Toyota Tacoma vs. Ford Ranger, Part XII

midnight_stang · February 2002

Before that, the Toyota Pickup started 1988. I can find references to 1973 Toyota pickup trucks, but before that I don't know.

But how many early 90's Tacoma's/Pickups do you see on the road? That was the purpose of my previous post. Just saying how nice it is to have trucks that can not only deliver now, but when cared for can deliver many decades and owners later. I guess nobody drives the old Toyota's because 1. They either rusted to pieces, or 2. They could only fit a 2.0l 4 cylinder under the hood.

Also I would question the care your girlfriend's parents have given their Ranger. The truck should be no more than halfway through it's lifespan, but falling apart, it probably received the red-headed step child treatment.

sonjaab · February 2002

I had 2 of them 74 & 79. Lousy heaters,
Rust galore from brutal NY winters and
salt. Blew head gaskets in both (not under
warranty) Lousy dealer service. I believe
they only had 1 yr , 12k mile warranty !
Both bought new ! GMs after that !
Not flaming toys just MY EXPERENCE !....Geo

BTW:Both bought during our supposed oil
crisis ! They were GREAT on gas tho !
My dads 73 chev 1/2 6 cyl stick could
barely get 10 mpg !

sc0rpi0 · February 2002

I see a good share of rusted up American trucks here in Austin.
As an inquery: wasn't a 2.0L engine enough 10 years ago? The latest craze for bigger engine pretty much started with SUVs. A 2.7L I4 that 4-banger Tacomas have in them, one pushing 150hp, seems to be enough for those who have it, and from their opinions they would not switch to V6.
I still see some Toy Pickups out there. Just last Saturday, at the Devils Den in San Antonio, one of the trucks in our group was a 1983 Toy Pickup with the 4-banger. Looked a little banged up in the front from an old accident, but not rusty and running pretty good.

allknowing · February 2002

I see lots of old Toyota pickups here in So. California. In fact it would be difficult to not see one driving around here if you out on the road for an hour or so. In contrast, I rarely if ever see an old Ranger here.

saddaddy · February 2002

I see tons and tons of old toyota pickups on the road. There are as many pretacoma toyotas on the road here in MS as there are Tacomas - prolly more. They all run real good, too. I know several people with em. They beat the hell out of em, do some body work after 12 years and keep on going.

eagle63 · February 2002

I think the biggest factor in having a 20+ year old truck is how well it was taken care of. A truck kept in a heated garage it's whole life that was treated well mechanically and not driven hard will probably last a long time, no matter what the make.

sc0rpi0 · February 2002

Grand Cherokees are finally getting recalled with their old trannies that allow vehicles to roll backwards. 1.6M SUVs total. I've heard about this at least 1-2 years ago, there was a TV story on some woman who killed her kid like that, and they are just now getting to recalling it. The story is on Yahoo somewhere.

sebring95 · February 2002

Most were worked hard here in the oil fields, as that's the truck of choice. Most of these guys keep them forever. Personally know of several 88-90's 4X4's with well over 300K and beyond dents in every body panel, they hold up rather well. One thing to consider is there weren't as many Toyotas sold 20 years ago, so there weren't that many on the road to begine with. You'd have to compare the number still on road with number sold new to get an accurate statistic.

All I know is an early 90's Toy 4X4 is expensive to buy even with high miles because there is alot of demand for them.

sonjaab · February 2002

and rust belt NY. The worst ting you
can do is put your daily driver car or
truck in and out of the garage during
winter !!!!!!
Garage is always warmer than outside
and warms up that salt enough to eat
that sheetmetal FASTER !!!!!

tbunder · February 2002

"an early 90's Toy is expensive to buy even with high miles because there is alot of demand for them."

exactly who wants an old underpowered rust bucket with blown engine gaskets? you must be talking over in the middle east, eh?

seems that's all i see on the road today is early 90's toyota pickups with that awesome 2.8 in them, seems everyone's trading their trucks in on them. not!

sorry, but i had to. it was too funny reading your quote on the high demand of old toyota's.

sc0rpi0 · February 2002

Since nobody wants the old Fords, you might as well make fun of Toyota. We understand. How many old Toyotas do you see in papers and on the side of roads with "4 Sale" sign, and how many Rangers? Or just check out any used car dealership and compare the ratio.

kbtoys · February 2002

Or you could just compare resale value between an old toyota and an old ranger

sc0rpi0 · February 2002

Ford resale value may not drop as fast the first couple of years, but after that it's like a joyride down the rollercoaster.

sebring95 · February 2002

according to edmunds, 1990 similar model 4X4's, Toyota is $600 more (that's ONLY 20% more). There's actually a bigger gap than that here. My dad was looking for a cheap truck to run around the farm. Bought a '91 Ranger reg. cab 4X4 with 120K miles. Paid $3600 for it and it had new timing belt, new clutch, and new 30" tires. I know for a fact I can't buy a similar Toy anywhere near that price. Maybe totally ragged with 200K miles and bald 225's. If I was to pick up a beater truck, an old Toy is about the only thing I'd consider. That 4 banger in my dad's truck is weaker than any Toy 4cyl I've driven. And that push-button 4X4 system it has is about worthless. Push the button, drive around wait for it to engage. Maybe it will, maybe it won't. Garbage.

2k1trd · February 2002

Ok i'm at work today (working on a crappy Kia)and i notice the guy who reads the electricity meter walk in and he's driving a new Ranger 4x4 (company vehicle)and i ask him how he likes the new Ranger compared to the older models he had been driving and he gives me this face and replies and i quote "nope they are still crappy and it's got 11k on it and just had the rear shocks replaced and there are a bunch of little sh@#$#$t problems with it too!" ...i just laughed.

kg11 · February 2002

NO ! The 2.0(20R) and 22R did not have enough power !They only got about 20 mpg(4x4)because they spent too much time in lower gears.They were slow but they hualed alot for thier size.Most important (to me) they were the most capable off road little truck ever built.They are still sought after by off road enthusiasts,but we all would have liked more power.IMO the 2.7 would be perfect for this,1000lb less than Tacoma,truck.
As for the value of old american trucks.There cheap to rebuild,or modify and very popular.The truck my Taco replaced was a '53 Willys PU.I replaced the early buick v6 in it for not much more than the price of a toyota starter.Everywere I went people wanted to buy it from me.They even came to my door and asked if I would sell it !
kip

allknowing · February 2002

Now that you have me really looking, I saw 3 old Toyota trucks and no old Rangers at lunch today. On the way home I saw five old Toyotas (two really ancient but looking good) and one older Ranger. Since Southern California pretty much has more vehicles on the road driving more miles on average than any other state, I would say that this limited experiment is significant. It appears that your statement doesn't hold up and that more old Toyota trucks are still being driven than old Rangers to me. Considering the fact that Toyota sells way less than Ford (as you Ford guys love to point out), and more older Toyotas are on the road than Fords, I can clearly see why Toyota has the reputation and Ford doesn't.

smgilles · February 2002

What cars do people have the most interest in?

http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/list/mostpopular/45763/article.html

No Ford Ranger in sight! Tacoma #19 out of 50
Ford had a total of 5 cars vs Toyota's 12!

I know it doesn't mean anything, but Toyota wins again:)

allknowing · February 2002

That may mean that the Ranger buyer already knows that he's buying a piece of junk because he's paying less than the Tacoma. Consequently, he doesn't bother to research the Ranger.:)

tbunder · February 2002

toyota wins again? what? in what category? ranger has the tacoma beat in everything. sales, power, options, towing, configurations, price, etc.

as for resale value, the gap is not that much if any now. considering the ranger sells over a hundred thousand more units a year over the not so sought after tacoma, it's only common sense that more of them will be for sale and the value won't be as much. there are more of them guys. a little analogy- harleys vs. japanese motorcycles. when i take deliver of my harley hugger two months from now, it will hold its value forever. since there are more [non-permissible content removed] cruisers and they are cheaper, they won't hold their value as well. the tacoma isn't nowhere near as sought after as the harley, nor will it actually appreciate in value, but it's a fair comparison regarding fewer units produced and holding value vs. lots more units produced at cheaper prices and not holding their value as well.

as for that worthless article on what people have the most interest in, i guess they missed the final sales reports for the last 15 years. seems the ranger has the most interested buyers, how could it be the sales leader if it doesn't have more interested buyers? explain that one? lmao

smgilles · February 2002

they sell more because it takes 5 Rangers to equal one Tacoma.

You previous prices summed it up, more units produced at cheaper prices. You know how they create those cheaper prices??? You guessed it CHEAPER PARTS, which equals CHEAPER TRUCKS, I am sure you get the idea. The only thing I have seen Ranger win is the ability to mass produce and flood the market and over saturate it with JUNK, what kind of marketing is that? For going to Simpson you sure do surprise me!

Why research Ranger when they are a dime a dozen and you need a dozen to last as half as long as a Tacoma or Nissan for that matter. This last statement is a joke.... It would only take 5 Rangers, not 12!

midnight_stang · February 2002

And what is exactly the most clicked upon url prove? That people would like to know more.

If it took 5 Rangers to equal one Toyota, and since the Ranger is about 1-2 thousand less, then that just does not explain the sales figures. You better watch out when the 2003 models roll out. Then we shall see who's url gets the most clicks then.

Cheaper trucks, well in price I'll agree. In quality I'll object. Simple mass production allows actual prices to be less, because you have bulk pricing. Sort of like bundling a clock in with the radio, instead of charging the customer 80 bucks for it. Toyota might change this method, but only if the 80 dollar surcharge is offset by the savings in dash real estate and tooling and machinery to get that clock in the dash(where the driver can't easily see anyways).

Rangers still serve the general public better in functionality, safety, ease of maintenance, and value and price. And the sales numbers have shown this for the past 15 years.

sc0rpi0 · February 2002

why sell it? I'm planning to drive my Toyota for quite a number of years, especially after I pay it off. And not because I can't afford to buy something else, but because a car is an investment (although a poor one, that always deprecated in value, but at the end it serves you well at the trade-in).

allknowing · February 2002

Yeh but you don't put all those extra miles driving back to the dealer for recalls that a Ranger owner does. The extra miles wear the Ranger out quicker than a Tacoma.:)

sebring95 · February 2002

for once I do agree with you a bit on the middle segment concerning supply vs demand. Exactly why the older toys are in demand here. There aren't as many of them so they bring a premium price on the used marketplace. When I sold my Tacoma, I was very pleased with the response and it went fast for way over trade-in value.

I'd watch that hugger though, I jumped out of the harley market a year or so ago. The Sportster's are already a dime a dozen, and won't be long on the rest. I made about $1500 on my '98 hert. softail and got three years of riding out of her. I have a feeling those days are numbered.

tbunder · February 2002

perhaps, but it's still a harley and still a hugger. those are kind of hard to find. especially in the new impact blue color for '02. just check out cycletrader.com to see what used hogs bring. its still absurd. no, im not planning on using it to make money. i plan on buying it and keeping it-forever.

as far as being a dime a dozen, not here. not sure where you live, but had i not been friends with a sales manager at c&c cycle in chariton (the midwest's largest harley and everything else dealer) it would have taken me two years to get into any harley. the big twins are sold out for five years. the awesome thing is that im getting mine at msrp.

allknowing- then please explain how my dad's '88 ranger 4x4 4 banger now has over 200K miles on it, and he's done NOTHING to it at all. also, the '01 rangers only had one recall that only affected a few trucks. so what are you talking about?

scorpio- who's selling their ranger? only reason i let mine go was because i needed more room.

sc0rpi0 · February 2002

Next time you go past a used cars dealer, look around. You'll see who's selling thier Ranger. Or just look in the sunday paper.

sebring95 · February 2002

My bike was supposed to take a year at H&M in Dover, OH. But some goober had ordered one a year earlier, had them add about $3K in chrome, then couldn't get financed. They called me so it only took about 5 months. Last time I was up there they had a couple reg. sportsters in stock but they were wanting a premium obviously. I planned to keep mine long-term, then decided to get into a new hobby which required a large influx of cash. I'm a bit tall for the softail anyway.

To keep it on topic, a Harley doesn't fit in the back of either truck.

plutonious · February 2002

The Mazda B series trucks are nothing but re-badged Ford Rangers. So how in the world is a Ranger better than a Mazda just because more Rangers are sold? Get the point? More sold does not equal better.

tbunder's words:

"toyota wins again? what? in what category? ranger has the tacoma beat in everything. sales, power, options, towing, configurations, price, etc."

Maybe on paper the Ranger wins, but not in the real world. I've posted that comparison article numerous times now which specifically found the Tacoma beat the Ranger in ALL PERFORMANCE CATEGORIES: Braking, four-wheeling, suspension performance, acceleration (loaded and unloaded), etc.

I tend to value performance more than brochure data, unlike some others here, tbunder.

Finally, if the Ford and its Ranger are so great, then why don't they have the sterling reputation that Toyota does?

midnight_stang · February 2002

The Ranger was ranked as reliable as an Accord. You know the car that beat out the Camry in 2001?

Scorpio--->The people selling their Rangers? I don't know and I don't care. With the "market flooded" with Rangers, wouldn't you expect to see them being re-sold in the used market. I'll be trading mine in, in under a year.

plut--->For one thing, there are zillions more Ford Dealerships than Mazda. More sold means meeting public demand. See economics 101. On paper and in the real world, the Ranger fulfills demand. You forgot safety, towing capacity, interior space, and bed size. I also don't think you can lock down acceleration to the Toyota, but you may have braking or fourwheeling (i.e. Your bible or Fourwheeler magazine). If I wanted to buy the ultimate mini pickup for off-roading, I might get a Tacoma. However since my vehicle will spend 99% of it's life on paved roads, I'll just stick with the Ranger.

allknowing · February 2002

One recall a year is about average. Your one recall on your Ford 01 is already twice as many recalls as my 00 Tacoma.:)

rmyers76 · February 2002

Rental car companies like Budget and others use the Ford Ranger as a rental vehicle. I think this may add to the number of used Rangers you see on a car lot. I am shopping for a used Ranger right now and many of the vehicle disclosure statements list "Rental Fleet" on the sticker.

Granted, I'm never going to buy a used rental vehicle because of the abuse.

mjbwrtr · February 2002

click and clack recently answered a question about buying rentals. they said go for it, because the deals are often good, and that leases are treated far worse, in their opinion, than rentals. plus rentals have all maintenance records.

saddaddy · February 2002

Yes you can lock down acceleration for the Taco. Trust me, I found out today. I have never said anything about such b/c I the point that these are trucks is very valid. Acceleration is rarely very important. However I wanted to take this chance to set your skepticism right. I smoked him.

issisteelman · February 2002

I'm not trying to flame anybody here, but let's be realistic. People who are honest will admit that a Tacoma is a better quality vehicle than a Ranger. Some of my best friends who are BIG Ford fanatics freely admit that as far as compacts go, a Tacoma is a better quality vehicle than a Ranger, hands down. They will, however, argue with me regarding full size pick ups, but that is a different subject for a different message board (I'm, quite frankly, undecided on that topic but I do like full size Chevy pick ups based on personal experience). And believe it when I say that the quality gap is BIG and not small as some have tried to say. Again, as one of my Ford fanatic friends once said, "You simply cannot kill a Toyota motor". Ain't that the truth.................Steelman.

tbunder · February 2002

pluto- let's see that link to the article you're talking about. im sure it's a current post with at least an '01 ranger 4.0, correct? and the larger '01 ranger brakes? right? and even maybe with the FX4 for the larger tires, eh? probably not? what? you're posting old info again? come on, show us something current. i do believe you have it backwards, the ranger wins in the real world too bud. the real world is the showroom floor. who wins there? if the tacoma won in the real world, you'd see tons of them at their dealers' lots so all these people that mysteriously think the tacoma is better would be able to buy them. ill say it again, the ranger totally blows the tacoma away each and every year in sales. if the tacoma is so good, and im sure toyota makes a bundle off it, why don't they build more and try to put up a fight to ford for customers? if its so good and reliable like you say, and it sells instantaneously, couldn't toyota just kill ford at the showroom if the customer actually had a chance to see one?

allknowing- how can i have twice the number of recalls than you when i only had one? please explain that one. 0x2=0. 1x1=1. 0x1=0.

saddaddy- you raced an old OHV 4.0 or a 3.0.

steelman- ""you simply cannot kill a toyota motor". lmao, tell that to the people who have locked up toyota engines with not even 40K miles on them. im an honest person, and can say that the ranger i had was a very solid truck. i drove a new tacoma a couple months ago, it wasn't near as tight as my ranger and felt very slow compared to my 207 horse SOHC 4.0. of course the torque was missing too. they really need to upgrade their 3.4, its just a pooch. no low end grunt at all.

sebring95 · February 2002

http://www.autosite.com/editoria/asmr/svolpu.asp

Interesting that the Tacoma only sold 3800 less than the Ranger. Considering the heavy discounting on the Ranger and lord only knows how many are fleet vehicles. Apparently there are quite a few customers willing to part with more money to get into a Tacoma. I'd also be curious to see how many of those numbers were 4X4 vs 4X2. Based on what I see on the road (% 2wd vs 4wd), my money is the 4X4 Tacoma is very close in sales to the 4X4 Ranger.

At least they both easily outsold the Crapalanche.

sc0rpi0 · February 2002

Toyota DOES sell its target volume every year.
if you go to a Toyota dealership here in Austin area, there wont be many Tacos at the lot. 5-15 on average, from the 3 dealers I've been to over the 3 month period when I was buying the truck.
Go to a Ford dealer..or any used car dealer. You'll see how many Rangers there are there.
As for your "why don't Toyota make more of them", ever heard of business strategies? Toyota may be doing this on purpose. It's a heck of a lot better that Ford business strategy: lets flood the market with cars, then have 5-7 recalls on them (Escape and Focus, 1st year), then 3 more recalls next year (Focus again), then fire 30K people.

Don't worry about the old engine: it'll get bigger. Your arguement is more or less valid: yes, Ford does have a bigger engine. Of course, Ranger only got that bigger engine 1 year ago. So Toyota will answer that claim with the new Tacoma. It may actually have a V8 in it, a new redesigned 4Runner is getting a V8, looks like it's a Tundra one.

saddaddy · February 2002

I'll bet Toyota comes up with yet another superior engine that still gets knocked for being smaller in displacement. That seems to be the way they go and I can't wait. I say superior, but I know some of you disagree. I honestly can't see any need for such a small amount of extra hp or torque in the Ranger. Sure its nice to say you have more, but the difference in power (power band included) really is not that great between these 2 powerplants. Kinda like my theory on their compared towing rates that is 500 lbs in favor of the Ranger. Know one is gonna haul 5000 lbs much less 5600 or whatever it is. It would really be less than true, I believe, to say that there was a significant difference between the performance of the v6s in these trucks. That said, with the 0.6L difference in displacement, who can help but give Toyota engineers the W. Nevertheless, I can't wait to see what both manufacturers come up with to make these things even better.

allknowing · February 2002

Technically you're correct, however, you may want to note that I was kidding with you. That's why the little happy face is at the end of my comment "

". How about this instead. You have more than twice as many recalls on your 01 Ranger as my 00 Tacoma. That would be more accurate mathematically and sounds even worse.

tbunder · February 2002

if the tacoma is so awesome, and so many people are just buying it and finding out its so good, how come its falling behind its last year's numbers for sales so far? ranger is too, but hey, you expect that right since toyota is supposedly selling so fast?

sebring95 · February 2002

you'd find a way to turn the numbers around. Greatest thing about statistics...presentation!

Bit of exaggerting on your part though. Tacoma sales are off 4%, Ranger sales are off 20%. Overall sales is the only true way to compare, which were down about 1%. My POINT was you'd think that $2000 rebates would get more than 3800 people to buy a Ranger over a Tacoma just from a cheap bast**d (CB's) standpoint. I mean we all know CB's that don't care what it is as long as it's cheap. How else do you explain Lumina & Taurus sales? Did the Tacoma have any big interest or rebate incentives? '97 was the last year Toyota had anything I really liked so I haven't paid much attention to their sales blather. Unfortuntely, I'm near one of the largest Ford dealers in the country and am bombarded with their ads, thank God for XM radio!

tbunder · February 2002

hey bud, dont get excited. i am just stating facts. your presentation is where i got them at. tables can read very tricky. you have to look at the raw data and compare. the tacoma is very impressive with its advantage over S10's. i think it's a good truck. they're just a little too proud of the thing, that's all. it all boiled down to the ranger STILL outselling the tacoma- again. to who it doesn't really matter. they all say ford and ranger on them. peace

kbtoys · February 2002

Off the subject but how do you like your XM radio?

sebring95 · February 2002

It's good when I'm traveling within 40 miles of my home area as we have zero radio stations that are worthy to be called that. Every single available frequency is owned by one company and they only broadcast on 4 of them. Pop hits, country, 40's, and 24 hour news + the DJ's are paid about $5/hour based on their intelligence level. I live in a very hilly area and all the good metro stations are blocked out. Usually I'll switch over to normal FM once I get close to the metros because I really like some of the good country, classic rock, hard-rock and talk shows (which XM really doesn't have any good ones talk shows). It's good, but if I lived somewhere with good stations I would never have ponied up the up-front cost. The $10/month is beans, but I think it cost me $350 for additional equipment and I drive multiple vehicles which I had to put in the one I drive the most. Auto manufacturers are putting it in their radios standard so that would be a better deal.

I was surprised how the Taco outsold the S-10 also. I mean, seems like there are plenty of hard-core Chevy folks out there bashing anything without a bow-tie. Some mentally challenged dude was arguing that the Tacomas have tiny little differentials and axles, while I've been under both and an early 90's Chevy full-size has the same size diff/axles so I'm not sure where he was going with the argument.

sc0rpi0 · February 2002

Sales numbers are all relative. Just saying that Ford sold 14927 units of Ranger is useless. May seem like a lot, but when you look at where you were last year, picture becomes pretty bad. Sure, Tacoma was outsold, but the decline in Tacoma sales was far less than Ranger sales. So in fact, Toyota has gained market share in the compact truck market, at the expense of Ford. Outselling Tacoma by 3800 units is not a statement of anything. One would think that 0% financing and other rebates that Ford has been offering for the last several month on Ranger would produce a rise in the sales. Instead, it couldnt even keep the sales flat. What will be interesting is next year (or late this year), when economy bounces back up, and Ford will discontinue the 0% and rebates. Since they failed to sell the target number of vehicles (obviously), they'll be stuck with a large inventory of trucks that won't even have rebates on them. (GM is counting on exactly the opposite: with their 0% they sell more than usual now, and next year they will offset their losses from the 0% program by jacking the vehicle prices up. Without rebates and limited inventory people would have no choice but to pay up).
So we haven't seen the end of it yet. Ford might decline even more.

tbunder · February 2002

ford hasn't had 0% financing for a long time. they have rebates, but that's it. any 0% financing lately has only been for like 36 months, not something the average person can swing. so really it hasn't been a factor in selling. funny the tacoma declined in sales too. you guys are bragging it up, and then it slows down too. ill bet the estate that the S10 kills the tacoma in sales at the end of the year when the year end numbers come out. wanna bet?

smgilles · February 2002

Give me your definition of "kill" and then I will decide to take that bet

sc0rpi0 · February 2002

In recession, the company that loses least revenue wins. If company A had diminished growth by 5%, and company B had diminished growth by %20, company A wins and grabs market share of company B.
With or without big rebates, Toyota lost far less revenue, the sales of Tacoma were down only 4% (is that the number?). Ford was down a lot more, like 20%. So just because Ford sold more trucks, doesnt mean it's a good thing. Everything is tied into growth, not into instantaneous sales. You can be selling 100K vehicles a year now, but if last year you were selling 300K, you've got a lot fo explaining to do to the stockholders on why company is 200% in negative growth.
Whether or not S10 does anything is not the point here. We are not concerned with that right now. How come you are trying to shift the conversation from Ranger sales towards S10? Not liking where this is going?
tbunder, remember your econ classes (by your own statement, graduate from Simpson had background in all areas of studies. So where's your econ background? Or don't they teach that at nightschool?)

sebring95 · February 2002

and firing, and model cutting, and...... Been lots of companies that have stellar sales along with stellar losses. The businees I'm in, I could easily double my yearly sales if I cut my fees in half. So I can do twice as much work and make the same money? No thanks! I actually know a guy that goes out of his way to do work for very large corporations I think just so he can say he does work for "XXX corp.". Funny thing is he makes the same money jumping through hoops for the monstrous companies as he would working for companies that have 20 employees. Nothing worse than an ego! Or stupidity?

Toyota Tacoma vs. Ford Ranger, Part XII

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles