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
Marklo
I have NO problems with S-10's. Better built in my opinion. If I had to have a cheap work truck, I would get one.
Oh yeah, and I really like the Ranger Prerunner package....Oh what is that you say? There is no such thing (No, the "Edge" package does not count)??
Wow.
if ford would just keep their 207 horse butter smooth SOHC 4.0 out of the ranger and all its technical advancements out of the way, it may outsell the dakota and frontier and maybe someone will show some respect for it. but until it goes to the front in sales, towing capability, power and torque, and price, everyone knows the ranger just can't compete in the compact segment. obi, thanks for the posts. you have taught everyone so much here at edmunds. it's a pleasure to have you post your knowledge. it has enlightened me so much that i await each and every post that starts with OBI.
Although, if I were you, I'd not allow any "awards" influence your decision when buying a vehicle: Trailblazer won a "best truck award" of some kind, and 6 month down the road was stalling and had to be recalled.
this magazine quote thing here at edmunds doesn't prove anything. it's real world use that matters. and i'd bet that there are a ton more rangers on the road still working than any toyota truck.
01taco- just peruse the toyota tacoma problems board here at edmunds, and then tell me that CR is telling the truth. seems the initial quality and even long term quality isn't all what it's cracked up to be in toyota land. for $2-3000 more at initial investment and still not getting as much equipment on your tacoma, the ranger is the better choice for any buyer. it will go anywhere a tacoma will go and do it for less money. it's as simple as that. plus, it has more power and torque, more towing capability, more doo-dads (abs, security system, cd player, cruise, aluminum wheels, etc) standard.
sad- i never said i liked my ZR2's better, i said i like them and they were stout off-road. but i never said they were as tight or as well built as the ranger. they rattle like crazy. however, they take abuse your trd would never dream of taking, and that's the honest truth. go look under a ZR2, and then look under your trd. the ZR2 has full-size pinnings underneath it everywhere. it is very stout. they just need to refine it. who knows, they may have done that since mine. i had a '97 and a '95. the sonoma won jd powers last year for small truck, so it must be the best right? after all, jd powers is just like CR and we all know what they say is rule.
And I think it would make as much sense to discount the sales numbers as it does to discount what magazines say. I will, from this point on, blow every problem in the Ranger Problems thread 200% out of proportion just like you. You'll see how much sense it makes. And just remember, what I say is what RULES. Have a good one.
This fact is extremely apparent in the fact that the ARMY is buying Tacomas buy the hundreds to send to special forces in Afghanistan. Thanx for bringing that extremely relevant point to our attention.
Be sure to tell us when any Rangers get outfitted with .50 cal machine gun turrets. Everyone have a look to refresh you memories as to what the military deems the only compact truck worthy of service.
http://www.picturetrail.com/gallery/view?p=999&gid=1033245&uid=484006
Jees this is getting easier everyday.
So no, they don't read CR. Instead, military personnel engages in field testing of prototypes.
So while I don't take CR too seriously, I would pay attention to other magazines. FourWheeler, for one.
And yes, nobody will dispute your statement about "i'd bet that there are a ton more rangers on the road still working than any toyota truck": It is true, but the wrong reasons. Seeing how Ford flooded the market with Rangers, yes, there are more Rangers out there than Tacomas. It's simple numbers. What would be more interesting to see is ratio of units sold say....7 years from now, to units still on the road (and rust buckets don't count). But since we can't get these numbers, we'll just have to say that "Yes, tbunder, you are correct, there are more Rangers on the road".
You think Ford is so much better. I disagree. Seeing the string of "accidents" happening to Ford, one can only wonder: why is it happening? Toyota doesn't make tires for their trucks and cars.
Why is it that when I look at recall info for 2002 Tacoma vs 2002 Ranger (4WD top of the line engine), I see two serious TSBs for Tacoma: off-center steering wheel and a pull to one side (And no, TSB that says "seat belt extender" is not "your seat belts don't work" that you've tried to say before), and for Ranger I see:
timing chain rattle.
fluid leaking from front axle vent.
vacuum leak
shift interlock, inadvertent disabling (whoopsie)
heater core: repeated failures.
This is 2002 models: Both Ranger and Tacoma came off a slight redesign in 2000. Who's got more problems?
What is that? Like 1/50?? Good job, dude.
And by the way, I never said I HATED Ford, just Rangers. Oh, and I don't like you very much because you know about as much as me when it comes to trucks....
NOTHING!
scorp- YOU need to look at a current issue of four-wheeler magazine, and not keep pondering on that nearly five year old article (pluto's favorite). the latest offering by toyota tacoma could only muster third place. what gives? it got beat by a dodddddddggggggggeeeeeeee. u proud of that one? but hey, its four-wheeler and what they say goes, right? hilarious.
obi- you're not worth the time. but ill waste a little anyways. it's obvious you know nothing about trucks, but please don't try to hide your own ignorance by trying to spread it onto others who have superior knowledge as compared to you. when you say that gm products are in the same category as the ranger and tacoma, things are real clear where you come from.
scorp, one more thing. you say ford "floods" the market with rangers. this may be true, but why do they do this? easy- because people buy them. is that so hard to understand? if toyota built as many tacomas as ford did rangers, there would be heaps of tacomas sitting around because dealers simply wouldn't be able to sell them.
it's clear who the public chooses year in and year out for their compact pickup needs. the ford ranger. you toyota guys hate this and hate to acknowledge it. it has more power, torque, towing, standard features, options, and it's cheaper. accept it.
People say what they want to hear. Anyone making blanket statements should know their folly.
and then he says that they don't use crew cab frontiers b/c they aren't off road oriented and not GMs cuz they are too low.
Sounds to me like you meant to say that they use tacomas for a variety of reasons including the crew cab option. Hehe, I know its tuff to "negativize" this one - its showing, tbunder. And how is a Dakota too big when there is a giant 1980 something Chevy blazer all camoed up in the background of those pics. ROTFLMAO!
You know, it's not like Toyota dealers are sitting there thinking "How the heck am I going to get rid of all these Tacomas in my lot?". They sell, and sell well. Toyota achieves their quota for the year. It's a different business plan, not lack of popularity with buyers.
Now you do have PROOF that Ford is better, right? Not just articles with peoples opinion, but PROOF, right?
Probably not.
kirstie_h
Roving Host & Future Vehicles Host
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
i highly assume that the military uses just as many fords, gm's, etc as they do foreign vehicles. probably more. how heavy are those big guns anyway? probably max out the DC payload don't you think?
I've seen one of them on the trail, it's not bad.
I can honestly say that my Tacoma was the most perfect vehicle I've ever purchased: prior to it I had 2 used cars, and now, with 16K miles, it's still running like new.
ps. i did get a NON lowered liberty. chrysler started lowering them an inch from the factory after a bad article thrashed them for rolling. the lowered ones say 4x4 on the back hatch, mine says it on the rear quarter. nhtsa gives it a good roll-over rating, or just as comparable to many other suv's. it doesn't feel any more tipsy than my previous explorer. did i mention this thing barely stickered over $22K? auto, power everything, keyless entry, cd.
thx stang. ill keep you updated.
Obi
Hope you rip them BIG time!
Obi, I have a 1998 Ranger with about 70,000 trouble free miles on it, and had a 93 Ranger with about 106,000 trouble free miles on it.. I have been in this chat room since 1998 when I purchased my Ranger. I never heard the end of it from the Toyota crowd, "its junk", "unreliable" yada, yada, yada... I paid 19,600 for this truck, loaded 4x4, stepside supercab.. Noway could I even touch a Tacoma for under 22K with the same options. So your resale better be higher, Toyota owners pay more.. How do you think Toyota just made record profits?? Hello....
I was going to sell this truck, but have decided to keep it. I now own a Honda Accord, Ford Escape and a Ford Ranger. The Accord has been in the shop 3x since 2000, Escape 0, Ford 0.. Please, someone explain to me how this has happened???
Take care and I'll see you in the woods playing with toys for the big boys..........Steelman.
I can hear the dueling banjo's now!
im not saying it's better off-road, i dont know. i haven't taken it off-road my man. but reading and viewing the actual videos of the liberty on jeeps site taken by car and driver, there isn't many places a liberty can't go. and these videos were taken with the crappy oem "all terrain" tires. i traded mine in on some BFG all-terrains. again, lets go see just how female oriented a liberty is. you make me laugh. it's easy to see whose jealous around here.
ps. true "snowmachiners" call their "snowmachines" snowmobiles- what the manufacturers call them. snowmachines make snow. don't have a four-wheeler. just got a new harley. don't need lumber, just bought a new house. plus, with my seats folded down, i have more room than a DC bed. one more thing, i hate to say it, but my jeep's a-arms are cast iron. they're not off a camry. sorry guys. but it's true. also, the liberty is actually larger, and wider than the cherokee it replaces. so to call it a "mini jeep" just shows how far you're reaching, not to mention your ignorance.
you always say something to the effect of "ill see you in the brush or in the trails". well, the trails you're driving on were probably made by a jeep. and chances are, the trails that YOU so call "trails", are probably a lot deeper than you'll ever know. ever heard of rubicon?
Just because it bears a name Jeep does not automatically mean it's the best thing since sliced bread. I've seen Liberty offroad. We had a guy tag along with us one one of the runs. He had a 3" susp lift on, dinky stock tires. He went through a 2-foot step (after stacking 1 foot worth of rocks), tore off the entire corner of his plastic bumper and busted the windshield washer fluid reservour while doing it. He just didn't care....that bumper sure looked like it was made of weak plastic. I've seen Tacos bust up their bumpers: ours hold up.
It is a mini jeep: it's an SUV that is designed to appeal to middle class' needs like grocery getting, soccer-team hauling with great ride comfort and numerous luxury features, while giving people the magic "4x4". Jeep Wrangler you could take places, bang the hell out of it, and then go some more places, and you wouldn't care. Liberty is this thing you buy to keep up with the Joneses to make it look like you offroad. Of course, needless to say that you can't lift it any, because it will look REALLY ridiculous (not to mention dangerous, given its' short wheelbase, tipping over forward or backwards is a piece of cake), you'd be stuck with 30x9.5xR15 tires. It may come from a family of offroaders, but that don't make it one.
I'll see you in those hard to reach (and currently very dusty) places in the heart of the great north woods.........Steelman.
The liberty is in the same niche as the Escape (and Tribute). It's not designed to be an off-roading machine, it's designed to fill the niche of people wanting an SUV, but nothing too big or impractical, or pigeon holed into being a land boat, or minivan. The Liberty is better suited for everyday driving, instead of those occasional off-road romps. It is also in a price range not offered by Toyota. The closest offering? The Rav4, while pales in comparison to the Liberty.
Think outside your box.