Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Toyota Tacoma vs. Ford Ranger, Part XII
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
stang will always try to establish culpability in such cases, but who really cares? Ford is ultimately responsible for the product they sell to the public. They need to raise the bar for their contract suppliers as far as I'm concerned.
I know I paid a little more for my Tacoma and it isn't loaded with all the bells and whistles a Ranger probably comes with. I don't care about the bells and whistles. I'm interested in solid build quality and performance. I will pay extra for a truck that wasn't built by the lowest bidders.
That's absolutely ridiculous to suggest you shouldn't be able to acclerate hard because it might blow up your differential. What a crock! This coming from the truck that "supposedly" out-tows the Tacoma (according to paper specs, anyway)! I can only imagine what would happen if you "get on with it" towing their advertised 5600lbs. That diff would snap like a twig!
Kind of surprising, huh, what with the Ranger having that huge rear axle and 2" bigger pumpkin, LOL!
To this day, over 4 years later, I'm continually reminded I made the right choice buying a Tacoma.
When it comes down to it - you make ME laugh. You don't even have a truck! Stay out of this or quit dogging my ride.
And the guy that wheels with the Tacoma boys - he's more adamant about his FORD than anyone I've met here, hands down. He works in a performance shop and has been racing vehicles all his life. He knows exactly what he is doing and knows off roading about as well as anyone his age short of Walker Evans. He knows exactly what he is driving and could tell you exactly what one needs to be driving to have a truck that deserves a sticker on the side that says "off road." Im out.
also, fyi, i haven't bought ANYTHING yet. so don't count me out quite yet.
but you can bet that if i do buy another truck, it'll be four-wheel-drive. im half tempted to go pick up an FX4 ranger just to have a little meet and get together. show you just how tough ford trucks really are.
im just saying that you talk like you are the off-road king, and quite simply, a 4x4 truck will go way more places any 4x2 truck can only dream of going-locked or not. and if you don't believe that, you must have a locker in your head as well.
you know, for the price you paid for your pre-runner, i pretty much guarantee you could have bought an ext. cab ranger 4x4 for less if not the same. that would have been a no brainer to me. brand loyal or not.
This same exact problem happened to a co-worker who had also just bought a new Tacoma.
When we took our Tacomas to the dealer to get this problem fixed, I specifically asked the mechanics and service people what the problem was. The answer I received was: "mumble, mumble, looks like it wasn't tested enough, 'cause there needs to be some baffles in the differential to stop the foaming of the oil. We've already seem several of these and the only fix we currently have is to add several feet of plastic tubing, valves, etc. to the vent so the lube that comes out has someplace to go." Wonderful. They also indicated that if the factory were to ever issue some sort of retrofit baffle kit, I would be notified. No, never any notification.
There are two sides to every coin, and while I know that this is just a data point, it indicates that Toyota is no better at product testing than Ford. Luckier maybe, but this happens to EVERYONE.
Inadequate testing? or low bidder? or a low-budget design?
tbunder - your statement "its still 2WD. imo, and probably others here, not quite a truck". Realize that many here (not me) think that the Ranger is not quite a truck either.
As far as the price thing you brought up. Well lets think:
1) I'm in school and can't swing weekly trips to the dealership to fix things.
2) Insurance costs would have more than made up for initial cost differences.
Serioulsy, I looked into it and 4wd was out of my range. I had to have a v6 and decent ground clearance. Fords of any type were out.
And no I'm not pissed off (ehh?). I still have a truck and you don't (toyota, ford, or what the hell ever). I think its safe to say that Im on top!
Avoid Dodges altogether. Make sure you test drive any GMC's carefully and look for shakes. OPINIONS of course.
IMHO, Toyota misplaced the "formula" when they introduced the Tacoma. Maybe because the Tacoma was designed in the US (not Japan) and again IMHO, the 4x4 Tacoma is a "purpose-built" truck, intended primarily for off-road excursions. The pre-Tacoma trucks were much more balanced and our '89 ran for six years without a problem. Our dealer had the '89 sold before they actually took possession of it as our trade-in. I actually tried to get it back when our '95 Tacoma started becoming a pain, but it was long gone.
I truly don't believe older Rangers are anywhere close to being as rugged and reliable, but they sure will be a lot cheaper. Good luck!
Toyota (and other Japanese manufacturers) have an additional problem to deal with: loss of face. They will go to great lengths (Mitsubishi, for example) to hide defects and placate irate customers before they even consider admitting that there's a problem. I believe that's one reason Toyota readily gave us a new '95 T100 to replace our troublesome '95 Tacoma after only four months. But hey, that could be a completely new topic, couldn't it?
What's up with all the green Taco's I've seen recently? Must be envy....
question too: Do you know if all manual tranny taco's have the "clutch cancel switch?" From what I understand this allows you to start the vehicle even if the clutch is engaged, right?
I recall that this switch was available as far back as 1989, as we had one in our '89 truck and actually used it a couple of times while 4-wheeling. A nice feature.
As for the clutch cancel switch, I think that it only came with the TRD in 2000. Rick may be correct that they all have that feature now as I'm not sure. I'll have to check on that.
I'll see you in the woods while riding in the best compact pick up truck (i. e. the Tocoma) in the world...........Steelman.
That came from http://autofinder.cincinnati.com/cars/tacoma.html
For curiosity's sake, I'm going to try it the next time I get in my truck.
Take care..........Steelman.
I hate to sound cynical but if one cannot handle the proper engagement of a clutch while offroading, one shouldn't be offroading. Low range has plenty of torque multiplication to not need any throttle while getting under way and slipping the clutch or a higher gear will limit wheel spin.
I surely hope this was not an expensive option since it has little value and can easily be duplicated by completing a simple circuit.
I do have a question, however. Based on steelman's version the vehicle has to be in neutral to turn over and in tuna's case the truck could be in gear. Which is it? I would venture to say if the starter motor will launch the truck in gear by someone inadvertently pushing a button this could lead to some lawsuits in our litigious society.
Tacoma owners, correct me if I'm wrong.... but I think the main purpose of the clutch cancel button is that if you're stalled on a big hill, you can start the vehicle while in gear, so you don't start sliding backwards down the hill while pushing in the clutch, holding the brake with the other foot, then putting it in gear, etc.
Here is as good an explanation as I can give. Don't forget, this is from a RANGER owner (but I've owned seven Toyota trucks):
The clutch cancel switch (it REALLY is a switch, disguised as a "button") provides the driver the ability to re-start on a steep hill WITHOUT having to disengage the clutch. If you are in low-range, and just happen to kill your engine on a VERY steep slope (it's happened to me, and to MANY others I've 4-wheeled with), using the clutch cancel switch can be MUCH easier than restarting and doing the three-foot thing with clutch, brake and gas to get going again. Believe me, Jack, the three-foot thing can be difficult, especially where slipping or sliding backwards or creating wheelspin are NOT options. Using the starter motor to get going in such a situation has been used by 4-wheelers since off-roading became a hobby/sport, and IT'S WHY THE SWITCH IS ON THE DASH! Big tuna used the switch for its intended purpose.
Steelman found a use for the switch that I hadn't thought of. Leaving the truck in neutral, pushing the switch and then starting the truck with a remote starter (I presume) the next morning. Very clever, steelman.
Jack, the switch is STANDARD EQUIPMENT on all Toyota 4x4s, and is NOT an extra-cost option. However, nothing is free, is it? To answer your question, a Toyota with a manual transmission CANNOT be started unless the clutch pedal is depressed, OR the clutch cancel switch has been pressed. It doesn't matter what gear the transmission is in.
FROM THE FORD ISSUED TSB:
Driveline - Thump/Clunk Noise
Article No.
01-11-11
06/11/01
^
NOISE - "THUMP"/"CLUNK" HEARD ON LIGHT
ACCELERATION FROM A STOP OR WHEN
BRAKING AND COMING TO A STOP - SLIP/STICK
SENSATION AT REAR DRIVESHAFT SLIP - JOINT
SPLINES 4X4 SUPER CAB ONLY
^
DRIVESHAFT - "THUMP"/"CLUNK" NOISE HEARD
ON LIGHT ACCELERATION FROM A STOP OR
WHEN BRAKING AND COMING TO A STOP - SLIP/STICK SENSATION AT REAR DRIVESHAFT SLIP - JOINT
SPLINE - 4X4 SUPER CAB ONLY
FORD:
1998-2001 RANGER
This article is being republished in its entirety to update the model year applications for the service
parts required.
ISSUE
Some 4X4 Super Cab vehicles may exhibit a low frequency "thump" type noise/vibration on light
acceleration from a stop, and/or when coming to a stop with light to moderate braking. This may be
caused by axle wind up during acceleration or deceleration and creating a stick/slip condition at the
rear driveshaft slip-joint splines causing the "thump"/"clunk" sensation.
ACTION
Replace 3.5" steel driveshaft with 4.0 "aluminum rear driveshaft. This requires installation of a revised
fuel tank skid plate. for vehicles built before 1/15/2001 equipped with the 4X4 Off-Road package.
Refer to the following Service Procedure for details.
SERVICE PROCEDURE
1.
Reference yellow balance mark on existing steel driveshaft. Using chalk, paint-pen or equivalent,
index a mark on the rear axle flange in-line with yellow mark on driveshaft. This will enable the
new driveshaft to be reinstalled in an original balanced state.
2.
Remove existing steel driveshaft from vehicle.
3.
Using the previous reference mark on the axle, align the applicable revised aluminum driveshaft
yellow mark to the axle flange mark. This will assure correct orientation of the new service
driveshaft.
4.
Install new service driveshaft and t6rque all eight (8) fasteners to 88-119 Nm (65-87 lb-ft).
5.
Remove fuel tank skid plate for vehicles built before 1/15/2001 equipped with the 4X4 Off-Road
package.
6.
Replace with new service Skid Plate (1L5Z-9A147-AA).
7.
Torque fuel tank skid plate fasteners to 34-46 Nm (25-34 lb-ft).
8.
Verify condition has been corrected by accelerating from a stop, and/or with light to moderate
braking when coming to a stop.
Parts Block
OTHER APPLICABLE ARTICLES: NONE
SUPERSEDES: 01-9-6
WARRANTY STATUS: Eligible Under the Provisions Of Bumper To Bumper Warranty Coverage.
OPERATION/DESCRIPTION/TIME
DEALER CODING
OASIS CODES: 597997, 702000, 702200, 702300, 703000, 703200, 703400
Copyright © 2002 ALLDATA LLC
Could I switch to an "automotive" all season tire for a better , smoother ride ?
I mainly use my Ranger to haul my jazz drumkit around.
i didn't experience any mileage change and it looks a lot better than the skinny 245's.
frey---> I see what you are saying now, the looseness in the drivetrain like that will make for some jerky driving. I gotcha.
but the ford FX4 just begs you to take it up against one, although that ZR2 pkg. can really wheel and take major abuse.
the tacoma looks kinda wimpy imo. maybe its just it's reputation as being a tin can with no power or torque. i know i know, it is a good truck, but it just isn't very intimidating.
also just fyi, the 245's that come stock on off-road rangers and now all rangers with 16" wheels, are exactly the same height as 31" tires and 265/70/16 tires. its just that they aren't as wide. also, toyota has only been putting this size on since '01. so "for years" really isn't valid, as before they just put on 31" tires on 15" wheels like GM started with the s10 and sonoma in '94 with the intro of the ZR2.
I couldn't give a flying flip about wheel size anyway. You know as well as I do that the more rubber the better. Bigger rims are for looks and IMO Yota made a mistake by putting 16s on the 01s. When I said "years" I meant 31x10.5 size, and did not even think about wheel size. Of course, that is something that sticks out to folks like you, and I should have realized that. You always say that Ford offers 16s standard, but never get a response -- that is why, its pretty unimportant to real truck owners. What's next big 20s like the new rams so you can replace a set of tires at $800 a pop, gotta love that. I'll keep my 15s as long as I can.
The reason I didn't include the ZR2 in the tough looking trucks is because they have 4 inches of frame sticking out from under the body. Gotta love that - really tough. Now whether or not it is b/c of a stock body lift, that's exactly what it looks like. You have given your thoughts on body lifts, tbunder. Plus, they have, bar none, the ugliest fender flares in the entire truck world, except for nissan. Not to mention the fact that the design has been unchanged for what seems like 20 years. They looked good when they were new, but were surpassed by ford and toyota long ago. Who gets to see many of em to brag about when they spend half their 80k mile lifespan in the shop anyways? However, I did base my "tough looking truck" opinions on just how high they sit (that is what matters to me), and really, in that arena only the ZR2 sits higher than the taco. Maybe the ZR2 should be "higher" on my list than the Ranger. Rangers just don't sit up high enough for me.
"when you're looking at an off-road ranger in your rear-view mirror, all you can tell is the width of the tires". IN YOUR 4X2? lmao
the ZR2 puts the taco on the trailer in its off-road components speciality. no other truck can brag about having totally SPECIFIC exclusive to this one model off-road hardware like the ZR2. i invite you to educate yourself and learn just what ZR2 means and what it consists of. trust me, its not just a locked diff. and some bilstein shocks like your TRD.
can you say totally different frame and chassis from a regular S10? totally different heat treated cv axles and a silverado sized rear axle? of course, these are just a FEW enhancements made to the Z. of course, they come stock with 4-wheel disc brakes too. axle track bar across the rear-end of the truck.....need i go on? nah, im sure you could care less and your brand loyalty and blind consumerism personality will no doubt brush all this under the rug, so i wont waste my time. more torque and power than your tacoma.....ok, ill stop.
jd power award for best quality in a compact....ok
one more thing about the ZR2's frame you call "sticking out, all four inches". this sticks out because it actually HAS a frame under it, a good sized one. you're used to your little dinky frame that barely shows itself simply because there is hardly anything there. the ZR2 is beefed way up from the factory, and this includes frame.
also, the ranger may not sit up as high stock, but nothing can touch it as far as articulation and wheel travel.
frey....i just did tell you a tire that you're looking for. the BFG 265/70/16 is the perfect choice. a tire that will still get you 330 miles a tank with a couple gals. left over, very smooth ride and very quiet, long lasting (at least 70K when rotated) and good in most terrain. i had them, and am speaking from experience. you pick what you want though.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
I'm not going to even bother researching what the ZR2 REALLY offers then correct you. Too time consuming and besides, you've destroyed your credibility on your own.
"i invite you to educate yourself and learn just what ZR2 means and what it consists of. trust me, its not just a locked diff. and some bilstein shocks like your TRD"
Let me try to educate you, since you won't do it on your own. The TRD isn't just Bilsteins and a locker. It differs from the regular Tacoma with its progressive front coil springs, modified rear leaf springs, off-road shock absorbers, larger sway bar, locker and better tires.
It would appear to me that tbunder just has a more open mind to different vehicles, instead of always, single-mindedly picking the same brand time after time.
You must realize other people will have different opinions on every subject, and you must accept that. You must also accept that opinions can change, as people's wants and needs change.
The S-10 is not that bad of a truck, as it is still around, and looks to be the same base of the blazer and sonoma. It ca not be that bad of a truck if it has(had) at least two other vehicles that share the same basic platform. I can not say much for the ZR2, simply due to my lack of knowledge on that subject. However a friend of mine has a late 90's base s-10, and it was a fun, economical truck to ride around in. Of course I am not looking for the ultimate in stock off-roading features.
I do know that the solution to negative bickering is empathy, tact, and having an open mind. There may be alternatives to your previously perceived truths.
So when it comes time to go car or truck shopping, it will always pay to know the alternatives. There may be a special deal, rare gem out, or something you never though you wanted/needed out there. It may also reinforce what you previously though before. Either way, an informed argument is much more plausible than one based on brand bias.
Take care and I'll see you in the Mountains where the moose, deer and bear (as well as other creatures) play.............Steelman.
However in the compact truck most wanted and fitting the needs of the on-road crowd, hands down the Ranger is a winner. The votes have been cast for January through April and it is 74,162 vs 48,816 in favor of the Ranger. (Are we up to 16 years straight yet?)
It is interesting to note that the only compact pickup YTD sales to increase is the S-10.
P.S. By pure definition, if you think my previous statement does not describe yourself, then it is all the more directed towards you.
Too bad they are never on any Chevy lots and usually have to be ordered. I wanted one bad back in 99, but could not find one and didn't want to wait 6-8 weeks for an order.
They just don't make enough of them AND they are overpriced.
Obi