Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
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
I guess a clock in the radio is too much to ask, too. At least in a Ranger you can read the time without moving your head.
I will agree that the engine and drivetrain options are pretty much the mean and potatoes of any truck purchase, and are the more determining factor in truck purchases. However, you really can't knock other nice amenities being available, like a 6 disc in dash changer. That's just something extra for those interested.
The other misconstrued point, was that if you want the ultimate off-road vehicle, you're probably not gonna have a very cherry truck when it's time to sell. Off-roading tends to beat up vehicles, especially sheet metal and drivetrain.
pluto, your new 3.7 (is that all they can put out) will be killed by the new ranger V8 coming in '03. not to mention the 275 horse I-6 coming in the new colorado.
again, you're using an article that is at least two years old.
and now, you're ditching your claim to four-wheeler as being the experts? i mean, they're the ones who say the new dodge is better than the TRD, both tacoma and the mid-size tundra.
scorpio- we may pay for these standard amenities, but we still get more stuff for less money than toyota offers. everything i stated costs extra on a tacoma. plus, you ever looked at those "bars" toyota offers? looks like something hanging off a hydraulic impala. at least ford builds their own accessories to fit each individual vehicle, and doesn't depend on an aftermarket company to do it for them.
that power advantage just kills you guys doesn't it? and as far as the lock-right locker? i don't know what you've read, (why would toyota boys have one in their trucks if the stock one is so good) but its rated as the best locker out there for the money. plus, you don't have to worry about switching it on, it releases the axles in a straight line, but locks when needed. and it uses no clutches to wear out. its trick, you should check one out.
"Any make gives you the option of purchasing options, hence the name, options."
Well, although any make gives you options, only Toyota gives you the options of lockers, superchargers and what's been acclaimed the best off-road suspension, which is what performance enthusiasts want.
"I guess a clock in the radio is too much to ask, too. At least in a Ranger you can read the time without moving your head."
The Fords we have at work require you to put the display on either "clock" mode or "radio station" mode. I would rather have the radio always show what station it's tuned into, or whatever CD track it's playing and having a totally separate clock which always shows the time. I get tired of pushing buttons to see what time it is, or what the radio's doing.
tbunder, do you really think I'm going to take any comparo pitting a Tacoma against a Ram seriously? Since you love that article so much, then why don't you go buy a Ram? And if a Ranger gets a V8, like others have stated, it will probably resemble something like the Dakota more than the current Ranger, putting it into a different class of truck anyway. Also, I would be a little cautious before jumping in and buying a new Ford V8 or the I-6 in the Colorado. History has shown that new engines/platforms, especially from Ford/Chevy, require several years before they are debugged. The 1999 Silverado/Sierra with the much anticipated Vortech engine is a perfect example. To this day, those engines still haven't stopped knocking...
Oh, and your comment about the power advantage of the Ranger "killing" me doesn't make any sense, unless you're trying to kill me by making me laugh to death. The supercharged Tacoma makes 265 horses and something like 275 lb/ft torque, I believe. And the Toyota 4.7 V8 makes 245 horses and 315 lb/ft torque, which totally outperforms the current Ford 4.6 (231 horses and 292 lb/ft torque). So you better hope Ford doesn't put their 4.6 in the new Ranger because Toyota will still clobber it.
As for lockers...well, you're probably more up-to-date on that stuff than I am. My truck came with a locker, so I haven't had to research the aftermarket ones, hehehe... Oh, and there's no cluthes to wear out on my locker either. Your LSD with no locker has that problem.
Have a nice day :-)
Obyone used to love to compare Tacomas to his Chevy 2500HD...
Really, you guys should be more selective on what you decide to post. When you keep comparing Tacomas to the full size 1/2, 3/4 and 1 ton V8 trucks (Lord knows you wouldn't want to compare Tacomas to the compacts - that's been done, and you guys just can't accept the results), all you're doing is speaking highly of Tacomas.
Yes, I guess Tacomas are worthy of comparisons to the full-sized trucks. But why wasn't the Ranger chosen for these comparisons as well?
Geesh, I should be WORKING instead of pursuing this nonsense...
Step bars? I've said it again that on a compact truck they are for nothing but showoff. Pozers like them. So do you, apparently. On my last offroad run, I've made up my mind to take off the Westin bar, because it was limiting the entry angle, and I actually did not go somewhere because of that. If anything, I'm going to buy rocksliders, and buy them myself. They cost the same or little less (depending) than step bars, and are much more durable, and would be far more likely to be a "lifesaver" than a chrome stepbar.
Oh, and by the way: "you are using an article thats at least 2 years old". That doesnt stop obyone from going all out about "98 Toy having a 1 star rating". Thats 4 years old.
Power advantage doesnt kill me. My truck is probably rated at the same hp as yours now, or very close to it. I'd have to pull the dynoruns from the similar truck to see for sure. Thats without spending $3K.
-Another thing that gets ignored is the recall data. 19 for the ranger vs. 2 for the tacoma over the past 6 years. That's a MAJOR difference. That's like losing the Superbowl 54-3. Maybe instead of spending money on new features and options for their vehicles, Ford should go back to the basics and learn how to build a vehicle that doesn't break....
You may also get more than you want to pay for, but you still pay less than a Tacoma.
Power advantage. Just because the supercharger is available, not many seem to be on the road. Compare amount of 4.0l's vs supercharged 3.4l's. But I forgot, no Toyota fan likes that comparison because Ford flooded the market and forced all the consumers to buy.
The power debate is silly. If I wanted to make a hotrod, I could easily install a vortech supercharger for less than the TRD supercharger. If you talk "deck plate" mods, I laugh and say, just remove the intake snorkle on your airbox, or get a K&N filter charger kit or cold air intake. If you wanna talk mods, part for part, Ford has you beat hp/dollar. All you can say is factory warranty, which if that is what you want, why are you trying to make your compact pickup a hotrod?
Ah... so you need to know that the hard rock station is on by looking at the dial, pluto? This argument is just about as ridiculous as your argument against Ford's unlocking when the person inside opens the handle.
Well since most truck owners don't need or want lockers or the best off-road suspension, maybe that's why Tacoma undersell? They appeal to a limited market.
Eagle--->I think it's more of an issue with suppliers, and making sure the new design elements doesn't sacrifice any quality. (I.E. Nassar cost cutting)
Aren't you the one who told me my '95 taco didn;t get recalled for head gaskets?I was mistaken about the date.It was '99 not '97.The recall afected 3.4s from '95 thru early '97.If there's no public record of this it makes me wonder WHO is doing the ignoring!
kip
I can't tell one Ranger from another. Even 4x4 models look like 4x2. So how can you tell whats under the hood? Sure, when you are racing someone and see them disappearing through your windshield, thats one way , but in non-racing conditions?
There seems to be enough charged Tacos out there for the market supply to exist. That alone tells that it's not a rarity.
Cant tell whats under the hood?
I assure your, a 4X4 Ranger looks quite a bit different than a 4X4...the grill...about 3 inches higher due to taller lift blocks...bigger tires.
Except for the Trailhead, or 4X2 Edge.
But what about the Toyota Pre-Runner?
Hmmm.
Your argument is not too good. BTW, I never take anything personal out our your comments.
BTW Ranger owners, you want power in your engine, here is the primier 4.0 engine builder. "Considered by many Ford V-6 enthusiasts to be one of the worlds' best kept secrets, Vanir Technologies continues to expand the Ford 4.0L "Cologne" 60 degree V-6 performance envelope through dedication, innovation and superior engineering.":
http://www.vanirtechnologies.com/
kip
BTW it still performs flawlesly at 103,191 mi
I agree. Prerunner looks exatly like a 4x4. The only way to tell is to check for 4x4 mudflaps, or get up close and see whether it actually says that it's a Prerunner. And of course, they only come in automatic.
My original comment to "I can't tell one Ranger from another" was to stangs' "How many supercharged Tacos are there?". You can't tell whether a Taco next to you in parking garage has a charger or not. So how can stang tell? Can you tell a new 4.0L engine from an old one just by looking at a Ranger drive by you in town?
also, im not the one comparing the full-size ram to the tacoma; four-wheeler magazine is. you know, your favorite? id assume the reason the ranger wasn't invited is because it didn't offer anything significantly new for '02. bottom line is your TRD came in third, in the same shootout it once won. face it, it's getting old and dated. and i notice you didn't address the FX4 issue. tell me, did you ever find one of them? this little shootout also tells me how much ford cares about this type of thing. i mean, they really could care less. they could have sent over an all new F150 FX4 and a Ranger FX4, but all they sent was a regular off-road F150. and it wasn't even an '02 model. they know they're going to sell more trucks than anyone, so why worry too much about it.
pluto, did you ever buy that supercharger to make your tacoma more powerful than my ranger? i mean, (for only around $3000 installed right?) when someone speaks so highly of it and brags it up like you do, i would think they'd be driving it daily.
oh, and your torque numbers are incorrect on the f150 4.6. it makes 300 lb/ft. yep, your tundras mighty 4.7 makes more power. what about the 5.4? 6.8? 7.3? oh yeah, the toyota stops at ONE engine in what THEY call full-size needs. and how much can that tundra tow? not as much as f150 can it? so, you're basically shooting yourself in the foot with this argument. what good is more power if it can't tow as much as the engine with less power? and one magazine said that a person would need helper springs if you wanted to do any serious towing with the tundra. thats just downright funny. and you're bragging it up?
saddaddy- the 4.6 can tow more than the 4.7. how funny is that? yeah, the 4.7 may have a power advantage, but big deal. that much power in a lighter truck with an advantage in towing already will sell me. the rest of your post i dont really understand. who is comparing what to an engine a full liter smaller?
scorpio- only 4.0 rangers come with the factory step bars and 6 cd changer. also, lsd is an option as well as 5-spd and a/c. what are you talking about? yeah, in '01 you couldn't get a 4.0 with a manual, but now you can. you say you have like 20-30 cd in your truck at all times. me too. you know what's cool though? just pushing the cd select button and moving to the next cd, instead of grabbing the cd case, deciding what one to get, taking both hands off the wheel to get it, ejecting the cd and putting in the new one. having a changer sure is awesome. i truly believe you are dissing them simply because you don't have one, or one would have cost you an arm and a leg. also, bars are just for looks? when one has 31" tires on their truck, they are truly more than "Just for looks". ask my wife. you can't tell the difference in rangers from 4x4 to 4x2? please dude, you're smarter than that aren't you? 4x4 rangers have flares ('cept for flareside beds), 4x4 have torsion bar suspensions, mudflaps, fog-lights, and a considerably higher stance since they come with 30.7 inch tall tires. 4x4's have cv joints coming out of the front axle. this is how i distinguish toyota pre-runners from 4x4's.
scorpio- any indication is just that. already the 4.6 can tow more than the 4.7, and i highly doubt the new 3.7 will have more power than the tundra's 4.7. so really you could just concede that the ranger's engine will be more capable than this "all new" 3.7. you all have to remember, it's not horsepower that is important in trucks as much as it is torque. that's why the ranger is so awesome now. its very torquey. also the reason it can tow more.
this whole argument/debate is what this forum is about. i like it. but that sales thingy, just can't be debated can it? nor can the power advantage. i mean, what good is a debate when the only way you can come out with an advantage is by saying "yeah sure,we can have more power, it will just costs us $3000 more than our underpowered stock offerering". to me, having that much power in a compact truck is silly. unless its a low rider. but a 4x4? just puts drivetrain parts under more stress and uses more gas.
you guys' turn. or is it guyses? hehe
smile guys, its fun. )
Just where do you get your information? According to Edmunds, here are the Ford's 4.6 F-150 specs:
Base Engine Size: 4.6 liters
Base Engine Type: V8
Horsepower: 231 hp @ 4750 rpm
Torque: 293 ft-lbs. @ 3500 rpm
Here are the Tundra 4.7 V8 specs:
Base Engine Size: 4.7 liters
Base Engine Type: V8
Horsepower: 245 hp @ 4800 rpm
Torque: 315 ft-lbs. @ 3400 rpm
"pluto, did you ever buy that supercharger to make your tacoma more powerful than my ranger? i mean, (for only around $3000 installed right?)"
An installed supercharger on the Tacoma can now be had for MUCH less than $3000. $2000 is more realistic.
And to answer your question, no, I don't have the supercharger. You've been making me think that $2000 would be more usefully spent on things like CD changers and shiny, cool nerf bars/running boards or whatever you call them. HAHAHA...that was a joke, tbunder. How old are you, BTW? Sorry bud, I'm only in my mid 20s myself, but I've already outgrown the car stereo and "tricking out" my truck scene. Actually, I was never part of it...
"this whole argument/debate is what this forum is about. i like it. but that sales thingy, just can't be debated can it? nor can the power advantage. i mean, what good is a debate when the only way you can come out with an advantage is by saying `yeah sure,we can have more power, it will just costs us $3000 more than our underpowered stock offerering'."
This one I REALLY like! Hey Einstein, the Tacoma 3.4 has been more powerful than the Ranger 4.0 for 6 of the past 7 years, and that's WITHOUT the supercharger. Now, the Ford 4.0 has been updated AGAIN and finally has a slight power advantage over the Tacoma. Wow, that's impressive. It took Ford 7 years to make a 4.0 outperform a 3.4! Enjoy your updated 4.0 while you can, because in a year the Toyota 3.7 is going to clobber it...
Besides power, why don't we talk longevity and smoothness for a second. Toyota drivetrains are some of the longest lasting in the business, and the DOHC Tacoma and Tundra designs are arguably some of the slickest, smoothest and quietest ones out there. The Toyota engines are much more refined than the others. Everybody, including those pesky automotive reviews you hate, has said the Tundra's V8 was very quick and powerful, yet incredibly quiet and smooth.
You know, tbunder, I have a pretty good memory. Not so long ago, you wanted to buy a Frontier and the fact its engine was some 20 horses weaker or so than everybody else's didn't bother you a bit. Now this 20HP difference between the Tacoma and the new Ranger seems to be of paramount importance to you. You thought your "locker" on your Ranger was the greatest thing since sliced bread, then you were informed you had an LSD, and suddenly you began spouting that lockers were totally worthless. You've stated in the past that you "jump" your truck and haul tons of firewood through the woods, yet your E-bay advertisement claims the truck has never been abused or off-roaded. You seem to exaggerate, post misinformation and lie whenever it suits whatever argument or point you're tying to make on any given day.
As for the sales numbers...I can't tell you why Toyota doesn't mass produce Tacomas like Ford does Rangers. I don't work for Toyota, and I couldn't care less. What I can tell you is Toyota has no problem selling its Tacomas. They're a hot item and always in demand, which is too bad because that gives the Toyota dealers more leverage against you when it's buying time. If you look at best selling designs, most (if not all) have been on the market for many years, just like the Ranger, Corolla, Camry and VW Bug. The Tacoma hasn't been on the market as long as the Ranger. How that equates to the Ranger being better, I'll leave for you to decide...
What are you talking about "when you have 31" tires". I have 31" tires. Well, I'm not gonna get into the whole arguement about "Yours are 265s, not 31s", but the point is, my truck sits higher than yours as it is. I have no problem.
Once again: read my previous posts about distinguishing the 4x4 from 4x2. What am I supposed to do when I see some Ranger sitting knee-deep in dirt, and not being able to get out? Drop down and check CV boots?
And once again: read my previous post. I've given you my story on the sales, and I've given you the story on power. Without having to spend $3K on a charger. So what are you now, selectively ignoring things I say too, just like you've accused us of doing?
Can pretty well tell the 4x4 by the 4x4 sticker on the side or gate of the bed, unless they have been removed. Like I said, the grill on the 98-00 I think the years are right.
I don't know about you but my preference is for a cleaner truck, no badges/dealer names ets. I take them off right away as they will fall off at some point in time, leaving non-faded paint.
Best thing about the S/C. Stay out of it and you gain mpg, but of course you get on it and well you know....
Ford's could get a little more interesting
How do you expect both side of this view to meet? Ranger engineers regularly meet with Ranger owners to see what their wants and needs are. That's how the FX4 was born. That's how the Edge package was created. It will still be the compact truck offering from Ford, like the Dakota is from Dodge. If (and when) the v8 appears under a Ranger hood, there will probably still be a v6 or two available, and maybe even a 4 cylinder. It would make sense to be no larger than an Explorer sport trak. Either way, my money is still waiting to see what Ford brings out. Until then, it's quite academic.
Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but wasn't it you who who stated something to the effect of "Who cares if the Tacoma is the uncontested four-wheeling champion? Maybe 1 out of 100 people care about four-wheeling anyway."?
Why would Ford develop the FX4 if only 1% of the Ranger buying populace cares about four-wheeling performance? A much more likely reason is that Ford needs to build something that can compete with the Tacoma TRD. How they plan to do that without offering a locker I'll leave to you to ponder...
I guess I differ from you because when I want to be in the outdoors, I want to see most everything on foot. Some of the most treasured backpacking areas are miles and miles away from any vehicle access. There is just something artificial about seeing the "great outdoors" with the A/C on and the radio playing, sipping bottled water out of your cupholder.
To tbunder as well: Maybe the first post came out harsher than my intent, but its all good. To tell the truth, I wish Tacoma would step up in the same way. I seriously doubt they will, though, b/c that would make it too close to the Tundra. Currently, the tranny and other components on the Taco are a heck of alot stronger than they need to be. If a major step up in engine size occurs, that which was once overkill might become breakable. Might happen with the Ford, too. In a sense I have mixed feelings about whether or not I'd like to see that happen to my favorite compact truck. However, I'm anxious to see what Ford comes up with. I'm sure it will be interesting. L8r fellas.
hehe. favre sux.
But Raiders game...well, I'm sure everyone'll have different opinion. I think Raiders deserved to win, Pats sucked. Oh well, it just means Pats will get washed out a week later. If Raiders won, we'd have had a good game to watch next weekend, Raiders vs. Steelers, but now it'll be a boring massacre of Patriots.
Someone mentioned the Corolla in an earlier post. Too small!! Wife has one and in this neck of the woods everyone has big SUVs. It is a fast little car that is very reliable. The Corolla will be gone shortly and replaced with another Toyota.
Walmart. What is a Walmart? Mostly Saks Fifth Ave and Federated stores. Most comfortable in a Barneys NY shopping.
SOMEONE GET STUFF STIRRED BACK UP HERE!!!
By the way, does anyone here have any experience with handheld GPS units, specifically Garmin brand. I am in the market for one and need a little guidance. L8r
also, btw, as far as corolla being replaced with something else, i doubt it. toyota just re-designed it. check out the '03 model, it is pretty sweet. but of course, it is way overpriced and anything that looks nice on it, is an option. besides, the new nissan se-r's will literally chew it up and spit it out with more options standard and a basically a race ready engine and chassis setup. no one holds a candle to nissan right now as far as bang for the buck, that includes lexus and acura.
as far as your "incident" with ford and firestone tires, how can you blame ford when it was founded that firestone was totally at fault with their faulty tires, and now they have recalled EVERY wilderness tire and atx tire? had you replaced your crappy oem firestones, (which ill admit ford should have used better stock tires) i doubt you would have had any problems. i got 65000 miles out of my wilderness tires on my '97 explorer sport, and they still had tread on them. only reason i replaced them was because they were paying the bill. ford re-imbursed me for the tires i replaced them with four months after i bought them. that's customer service at its best imo. they also paid for my ranger's new bfg's as well. im sorry, but no one can blame the explorer for all of the rollover accidents. i mean, come on, its a 4 door suv like every other one. its not abnormally large or heavy, has the same ride setup as most suvs 'cept the jeeps. i think the word scapegoat comes to mind in your little grudge against ford.
as for who wal-mart is; they are the worlds #1 retailer, with practically a $40 billion advantage over 2nd place earner (american), bankrupt kmart. im sure there's one rather close to you.
there, i think its time to bake. )