By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
I so not question the data you presented from Four Wheeler Magazine. However, will you consider that they accept advertising money from, say Toyota and Ford?
To quote Consumer Reports:
"Since 1936 our mission has been to test products, inform the public and protect consumers."
"We buy all the products...recieve no special treatment...accept no free samples. ... We survey our millions of readers to bring you information on the reliability of hundreds of auto models..."
Their survey data show the Ranger and Tacoma to be close in all areas. The input that resulted in the Tacoma bing identified as "...unimpressive..." having a box that is "...flimsy..." a ride that is "...has slow steering and an awful ride... a tendency to spinout on wet pavement..." comes from their use of the product and the input from their objective surveys.
They DO NOT take advertising money as Four Wheeler does.
To further quote Consumer Reports:
"If a product is high in overall quality and relatively low in price, we deem it a CR Best BuyTM"
They rated the Ranger a Best BuyTM over the Tacoma. That is as much a fact as the ones you quoted from Four Wheeler. They also list the 1995 Tacoma as a "Car to avoid" in their April 1997 issue.
Caveat emptor, "let the buyer beware"
Did you go to the fourwheelr URL I gave?
If you click on the specifications and the technicAL aspect of the trucks tests, this great ad informative article ACTUALLY has pictures of the underneath components. It shows the superior
toyota test numbers and the superior
toyota mechanical aspects UP CLOSE such as brakes, diff and suspenision. YOu can see all the test stats, and the undercarriage with your own eyes. Wow, what a difference between the Toy and the Ranger. Hmmm, it also said the Toyota could tow more than the Ford.
Anyways, check out that URL. its really informative.
Remember, consumer reports RATES cars reliability,
not how they handle offroad and in "tough" conditions.
Even if for some reason(which I doubt) 4wheeler
was biased, any idiot can see from the numbers and results that the tacoma is the far superior machine in ALL apsects(cept price).
Look at the specs and test results for yourself at that URL.
on the highway too! Look at how they do the tests to at the URL. They really get down to the nitty gritty in their tests. There is no messing around with these guys.
As for your "flimsy" bed accusation, that
little tidbit stems back from the 95 tacoma, the first year of that model.
I have thrown plenty of firewood and heavy items in my bed wihout any problems. In fact, the Tacomas Payload is a good bit higher than the Rangers.
The Ranger is a nice little Truck to live with for its price. But even Four Wheeler thinks that
"DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR The tacoma offers the BEST all around package of any compact(or maybe any truck) produced today".
Thats their quote, not mine. I think that says it all. It's a great machine.
Looking forward to getting my elk tags for Colorado this fall.........
Well did Consumer Reports mention what model they tested? ie base, SR5, Limited and so on.
To plant the image that because 4 Wheeler magazine accepts advertising money from car manufacturers and that 4 Wheelers' test or articles maybe slanted is a false premise.
Lets get to the general issue of why does one buy a 4WD pickup truck. For the most part it is a work truck and can go off-roading on those occasions. Now, if a buy wants a test relevant to off-roading then the comparison in a magazine that targets 4WD vehicles and the readership is very pertinent to the ability of the truck to traverse off-road. Consumer Reports does not do off-road testing. It would be expected that although Consumer Reports maybe informative it fails to tell adequately the off-road capabilities.
Why does one read Consumer Reports? It is not for the specs or price, but for the reliability. The Tacoma still has the above average reliability VS the Ranger's average reliability.
Yes I saw the Park Ranger.
Hindsite, when climbing up a mountain that high, tirque becomes essential. That's why most people that know things talk about torque. Horsepower is just some number that attracts buyers! Have you taken any physics courses? It shows that Hp is a calculated number derived from Torque, showing the complete on paper output of the machine. Not to say that HP is irrelevant, but when you are that high up on a mountain, speed doesn't really become a factor, as you want to truck/car to pull with more power.
Yeah, Idon't know much about the TRD package, or the off-road packeage and stuff from these trucks because I don't have a 4x4. That's why I am here. But as for work, I know my damn trucks. That is why in 1997, I bought the B4000. I KNOW it hauls more. I know Tacoma has a bigger payload, but when you're hauling things, I don't tend to use the box to hold that much. (At least I don't have an S-10) And yes, I do think that spoog is right when he said that Ranger is a better highway city truck. The cruising is much better than the Tacoma when I tried it out. I just have to wait to test drive them off-road or in the rain. Thanks for the info Spoog and cpousnr.
If you had READ MORE CAREFULLY what I had written in my post that I said TORQUE is not essential. Did I also mention SPEED? Show me where it was written in my post that I indicated whereTORQUE was not a factor. Then show me again where I mention SPEED. For your information I am a structural engineer and have taken numerous courses in physics and and other good things. Fact is there is an appreciable decline in horsepower if you were to delve into the matter. Guess you heard that old saying what you dish out you get back. Have you taken any reading and comprehension courses Sushi? Horsepower and torque are the same thing just measured differently. Torque is a twisting force measured in foot-pounds. 500 ft-lbs of torque is a twisting force of 500 lbs measured at a radius of 1 foot from the center of rotation of whatever it is you are testing (for example, the crankshaft of the engine). It is also 250 lbs measured at 2 feet radius, or 1 pound measured at 500 feet.....Horsepower is torque measured over time. Torque=Horsepower x 5252/rpm. Thus at 5,250 rpm on any engine torque=horsepower. Torque is just a measure of the twisting force of the engine which translates to its ability to move things.
If you had READ MORE CAREFULLY what I had written in my post where did I say that TORQUE is not essential?
A Chinese guy gets his first job in Canada, after living in Hong Kong from birth. Due to the language barrier, he is forced to do menial tasks in an office before he can upgrade his language skills. His Boss says "I was supplies when I get back" The chinese guy acknowledges this. The Boss leaves and comes back in 10 minutes. He sees that all the lights in the office are off. He thinks "What is that guy up to?". Suddenly, the Chinese guy junps out from behind the desk, flips on the light and yells "Suplise!"
with COUNTLESS reviewers and tests.
I think the Ranger is a decent city truck, but thats it. Its quality is fairly shoddy ( as I have proven), and its offroad prowess is sorel lacking( as I have proven).
It seems that Sushi is trying to get off the subject at hand which is the fact that the Tacoma toasts the Ranger in quality and PERFORMANCRE on
and off road.
in the SAn Juan national Forest, 1 mile from the
South San Juan wilderness boundary, the place where the last grizz in Colorado was killed in 79.
He will be working on his thesis, so he wont be making the hunt. But I will be using his tag.
The elk hang out right in front of his place.
Usually I hunt at my hunting property in Michigans upper peninsula. it's on a native brook trout and a great steelhead stream.
It's wolf country. Ive seen a few wolves the past several years. It is really swampy, rocky country, like a mountain laid on its side.
I enjoy Colorado alot also. Beautiful country!
The one thing I don't like is the altitude acclimation, and ttheres not as much waters as the Yooper. Cant wait for fall!
"Horsepower is just some number that attracts buyers! Have you taken any physics courses?"
I wasn't born the other day and know that was a sarcastic statement. If you can dish it out then you better be ready for a fire fight. I have a 421 superduty and 389 cu in engines in my muscle cars, so I have a good idea of torque. Funny joke, but I would not do ethnic jokes since it may offend some people. Okay no more jokes since you ask me fair and square.
Cpousnr,
That was suppose to be an informative posting stating hp of both trucks in relationship to the loss in horsepower percentage to elevation gain. Never said that the Ranger could not make it. Well, I don't have a topo map with me of that region and not doubting you. There is however a big difference in elevation between 10500 and 15,000 ft. Honestly it would strain the Tacoma if it did hit that mark I should have said also to be fair. It was a inadverent mistake on my part. One question and this is not a dig against the Ranger. The reason I ask is that a buddy of mine has the Ranger and he has pinging occasionally. I have read that there is a pinging problem with the V6 and was wondering since it was a octane problems.
LOL.. on the Polaris.
Spoog thanks for the informative article regarding the off roading ability of the Tacoma.
Ford/GM/Dodge build the best cars in the world. Honda/Toyota are overrated /overpriced/overvalued/over the hill in
design. (This should ruffle some feathers).
I posted the facts that refuted all the myths and lies he was spouting.
That part about 4wheeler saying "dollar for dollar
the best compact truck package(or any truck) available" must have wilted his nerves.
I dont like getting in to vehicle wars, but I feel it is my duty to stop the spread of lies, myths, and misinformation.
Vince8.
Didn't the 4wheeler reviewers actually say that
the Ranger's design was outdated? And didnt they GUSH about the toyotas design, especially impressed by the large brake callipers and locking diff. Outdated. lol. if outdated is
leaving everything in the dust and outcrawling, outperforming every other compact in an offroad and highway test, Ill take "outdated" thank you.
Have you checked out all the specs on that URL hindsite? You really should , its pretty cool.
theyve got pictures of the brakes, undercarriage,
and even compare the 5 nut wheels to toyotas 6 nut.
How about a little credit on the Peterson's wheel mag article. I brought up this article back on post 75......
For those who care i just finished watching a 4x4 thing on the Learning Channel, and they showed jeep wranglers, Tacomas, 4runners, landcruisers and hummers. Guess what they didn't show. I'll give you a hint. One starts with R and the other two start with Ex_________.......
-wsn
Proud owner of a 98 4x4 XLT 4.0. See you in the hills
recalls and the 4 Wheel Magazine review?
What COULD you POSSIBLY find on the web that
is more comprehensive and thorough than a 4
wheeler magazine offroad and on road review.
I DARE you to ACTUALLY RESPOND to my 4wheeler
review posting and my recall postings.
Dance baby, Dance!
GMU 75? A guy I work with got a 1,200 pound cow there last year. His brother-in-law runs the power station at, you will love this, Tacoma, n/e of Electric lake. Be advise the friend had his kill hanging in a tree at the pwr station and a bear left scratch marks 7 feet up the tree. I own 6 1/2 acres 14 mi so. of Westcliffe in the Wet mountains, east side of valley. Have a view of 40 mile of the Sangre's with 4 fourteeners. Kinda tough to take (he, he, he). They (including me) did not take alot of elk last year state wide, let alone GMU84 where I am going.
Couple of questions on the data you supplied from four wheeler. Some things don't add up.
1. It says that the vehicle has 3.73 gears yet also had the off-road pkg. That pkg gets you 4.10's.
2. It says RWL, I assume rear wheel for anti-lock brakes. Ranger has 4 whl anti-locks.
3. Curb weight on Ranger listed at 3,800 and Tacoma 3,820. Thought the Tacoma was around 3,300 so where is the extra weight from?
4. They list payload for Ranger at 1,180 and the spec for the vehicle is 1,260.
5. They list fuel tank for Ranger at 17. It is 19.5.
hindsite:
CR rates both 2x2 and 4x4 based on owner input. Less than 2% reporting problems gets best rate full red circle, 2-4% gets half red circle and so on.
I cannot remember if the last report rated 2x4 or 4x4 but I think it was 4x4.
As spoog said they do not rate trucks as a 4x4 mag would.
But that brings up a point. The title of this is not specific to the best 4x4 of the 2. It is the trucks in general. Certainly the ability of them as a true 4x4 is a factor, but not the only factor.
I have heard here about the pinging but no I have never heard it on mine. And I do use 85 octane. I will have 92 in though when goin hunting, just to be safe.
Where do you go that is 15,000?!?
Highest auto road is here in Colo on Mt Evans at around 12,260 or so. Engineers pass, a real bad 4wd road around Silverton is I think only 11,000 or so.
Plus elk do stay high but don't stay that high. Not enough food.
Just for info, when you gave me the URL's I read more than just the one on the Toyota TRD and Ranger.
In that magazine I found the following:
1993 Compact Truck of the year:
Mazda B2600. To quote from the article "reminds you of the new 4.0 Ranger. . ."
1994 Compact Truck of the year:
Mtusbishi Mity Max
1995 Compact truck of the Year:
Nissan
1996 Compact truck of the year
Ford Ranger XL
1993 Pickup of the Year:
Ford Ranger XLT Supercab
Toyota showed up twice, 1996 and 1998 Pickup of the year but never made the cut on Compact pickup of the year. Looks like Ranger or Mazda, which are more or less identical, showed up 3 times.
Just thought I would point that out.
Also, the magazine lists the clearance for the Tacoma TRD at 9.5". how did you get 12.5"? Just curious.
Tacoma offroad.
As for 9.5 inches, that is MINIMUM ground clearance on the trucks without TRD or 31's.
As for the Gearing ratio The Tacoma comes with the 4.10s standard, its not part of the offroad package. Its just one of the many ways the Tacoma is superior.
Did you read the points comparison?
The Tacoma even beat the Ranger in highway driving.
Look Cspousner, you may as well drop it.
Im not saying the Ranger sucks, Im just saying its a nice city/highway/ country road truck, and not a true offroader like the tacoma.
This message board says TACOMA vs. Ranger.
All those stats and my list of recalls show the tacoma is better in quality control and in performance, and engineering.
the Rangers a nice truck, but the proof is in the pudding. Acknowledge defeat, and be a gentleman. No point in slowly trying to string this out.
The arrows all point the Tacomas way.
\
As for the elk hunting, I will be on the WEST side of the divide, in the western half of the South San Juan wilderness. The Sangre De christo 14'ers look awesome when I drive through the valley and up over the divide to pagosa.
great place.
You don't have to say something directly to imply a perception on how the viewer may take the context of what was said. It is the way the subject matter is expressed. If you intended it without malice then I do apologize.
Mazda is partially owned by Ford, so I would expect them to be around. Honda is staying. Mistibubishi, Hundyai, Kia and Subaru I think will go the way of the Packard or AMC.
Too bad you missed those muscle cars. Well, my 421 superduty with Carter 8 barrel in the GP gets about 10 mpg on the highway. She belts out a whopping 410 hp and 490 lb-ft.
About the hp it is nothing something I read, but something I did calculated one day. Who knows I maybe wrong, but an interesting topic. Have to write it down and post it if Spoog does not get upset.
Cpsounr
Well I don't plan going 15000 ft, but that was just a number I picked. Honestly, Pike's Peak in Colorado is near the 15,000 ft. Anyway it was interesting to know what Consumer Reports has stated about the Tacoma. Thanks for the reply on the which Tacoma was tested. I am an animal lover and the only thing I shoot with is my 35mm or medium format camera. The best thing is that is that I never miss a shot
Spoog,
I serious doubt that the Ranger is a city truck. I think that it is a lot better than that. My friend's truck the Ranger does well, but honestly where the edge is the locker and the clearance.
Vince,
Well no matter what maybe said postive or negative of the Ranger/Tacoma the only thing I hear from you is the Japanese car makers are over priced and over rated.
The Tacoma toasted the Ranger in Tough, offroad conditions, it has a better engine, better clearance, better shocks, better acceleration in street driving, better gear ratio, better braking, better traction, better crawling,
bigger payload. Did you look at the stats in the 4wheeler test? It BEAT the ranger in EVERY SINGLE PERFORMANCE category. Every single one.
Shouldnt that say enough? Shouldnt that be the end of which truck is better? Shouldnt that tell
you the tthe Tacoma is a performance machine?
Man, the list goes on and on. Better diff,
better calipers, better drivetrain, better steering, better suspension. What else do you need to see? Ok. The ranger is less expensive.
There you go. I'll concede to that.The Ranger is a nice truck. ok? Just come to the realization that the Tacoma out performs it in every test.
And no, I don't have an idea what the disadvantage of the ring and pinion set up is.
I Dont think it matters when people are saying:
"Dollar for dollar the Tacoma offers the best all around package of any compact truck(maybe any truck)".
http://www.fourwheeler.com/newtrucks/ptoty/98/pastwinners.html
1989:Toyota SR5
1990:Mitsubishi Mighty Max
1991:GMC Truck K-2500HD
1992:Dodge Dakota Club Cab
1993:Ford Ranger SuperCab
1994: Chevrolet ZR2
1995:Ford F-250 SC PowerStroke
1996:Toyota Tacoma XtraCab
1997:Dodge Dakota
1998:Toyota Tacoma TRD
Now I offer a third alternative site for the Toyota Tacoma 4x4. This review is right on the money in my opinion. Take the article as a whole everyone and don't pick the parts that you like or dislike. Here is a quote from Malcolm S. Forbes:
"Education's purpose is to replace an empty mind with an open one.
http://www.bignet.net/~nctd/98/pick/98tacoma.htm
R. C. Samsel
"Character is the foundation stone upon which one must build to win respect. Just as no worthy building can be erected on a weak foundation, so no lasting reputation worthy of respect can be built on a weak character."
To go back to the topid ranger vs. Ford in general, in the 4x2 category, I think Ford beats Tacoma.
Hindsite, 10 mpg? yoiks. my 454 got 6 mpg highway. It had about 400hp, and 560 lb-ft. torque. I think it needed it though. Dually's back then were super heavy with their loads. It didn't go very fast anyway, but it did haul. I had a full camper with Shower, freezer, 3 sink, yada.... loaded on the back, 5 people in the cab, a trailer, a boat, and accessories going up a hill, and I held on steady at 2400 rpm's. Them other cars were revving it up. I was surprised that my trucks could maintain a constant speed. Nope, they don't make trucks like they used to.
Well that whole magazine is a bit messy. They have many different tests that they run
Truck of the year, compact truck of the year, super duty truck of the year ...
If you look, they take some trucks, in one case 3, in another 10-11, (pick any number) and test them. and then proclaim "(put a catagory here) TRUCK OF THE YEAR". But that is for that magazine.
Consumer Reports, based north of NY City, more than likely hits the hwys and the hills north of the city. They, I am sure, didnt test a TRD vs the Ranger. But they take inputs from users of the products. And they do not take advertising as "Four Wheeler" does.
It is off the direct subject but one of my sons friends has and S10 set up like a TRD. 31X10.5X16 BF Goodrich, Blistine(sp) shocks, nice skid plates, clearance I measured at 10.5" last night and high hp engine. The used 97 cost $15,100.
There are a lot of choices out there but remember:
This site is not specifically for Tacoma TRD vs Ranger XLT 4X4s. There I am sure are some people with comments on basic Tacomas and basic Ranger XL's.
I am happy with mine, sushi is happy with his, spoog is having an orgasmic experience with his and some un-named people seem to use their TRD jsut to beat Rangers at stop lights!
One thing for sure, we are lucky we can afford to buy these nice toys.
I'd like to here from someone that has an old Ranger with 140K or so on it and or the same from Tacoma's and see what they think.
Add this from the same source that you got the Tacoma:
http://www.bignet.net/~nctd/99/pick/99fordranger.htm
This favorable to the Ranger and I think is a fair assesment also.
http://www.bignet.net/~nctd/98/pick/98ranger.htm
"Ranger is Ford's answer to the masses of mostly younger buyers who, for reasons of size, price and long-term operating economy prefer compact pickup
trucks. It's been the segment sales leader almost since the day it was introduced in 1982, and contributed to Ford's 2 million truck sales in the 1996 model year, an all-time record."
Are we getting the point that a magazine can say just about anything? And most, with the exception of Consumer Reports, is PAID by the manufacturers to SAY WHAT THEY SAY?
As I said before, "Caveat Emptor" Let the buyer beware.
Glowing report. "Style...power...comfort..."
While I liked my Intrepid, I agree with Consumer Reports which marked it down in may areas based on owner inputs, some of which came from me in their annual survey. That is why, overall and in general, I trust CR's assesments.
http://www.consumerreports.org/
The ratings are there. Costs a small fee $2.95 a month for some of the special areas. Well worth it.
David Champion
Age: 43
Job: Director of Auto Testing at Consumers Union
Hometown: Bridgenorth, Shropshire, Great Britain
David Champion tested Land Rovers in the Arizona desert and Nissans in California before joining the Consumer Reports auto-testing program in 1997.
He oversees a staff of 16 at the 327-acre test track in East Haddam,Connecticut.
"We test around 40 vehicles a year, and each one spends about six months here at the facility." Groups of four similar vehicles are tested and compared on many points."Most of our tests are geared around the safety of the vehicle on the road. Does it have good handling, brakes, acceleration, visibility? Is the driver
comfortable and fully aware of what's going on around the car? All the controls should be nice to handle and easy to operate."
Champion gets to know each test car intimately. "I drive a different test car each day. I write in the logbook if my right foot got cold or whether the wiperblades clear a good area. Some radios have these little tiny buttons that drive you mad."
At the facility, his staff puts all vehicles to the test on the test track. For 4-wheel drive models, an additional off-road course with mud, rocks and water provides a challenge.
"Our tests and the experiences of our subscribers show that cars are becoming much better and more reliable" says Champion. "In the 70s and 80s, the Japanese manufacturers raised the standard and now American manufacturers are producing better cars."
Information gathered by David Champion and his staff on performance and reliability is featured in comprehensive reports for new car buyers or lease customers, provided by the Consumer Reports New Car Price Service. To learn more about how the average customer can save $1,600 on a new car
purchase."
Objective reporting, no advertisment accepted, a manufacturer cannot use them as a reference in their advertising, I think they buy their veichles off lots for objectivity and they get inputs from owners experiences/opinions.
hindsite is right. Be informed.
I still questions spoog's ownership. Check entry #96. He in no-way mentions the truck he owns then. If anyone actually owned a truck like this they would have started in right away not 20 posts later.
I did reply to your NHSTA report. As I have said. I give you 22 of those reported safety problems. Anyone who actually reads this will see that half or more are not safety related or repeats.
You stated there are no racing or offroad parts for the Ranger in one of your comments. I will list sites only and not take up too much room.
www.fordranger.com, they even have superchargers.
http://memebers.stratos.net/riderz/ranger.htm
Per auto news: Ranger sales up 26% in April. It remains the 4th best selling vehicle in the United States.
Ford remains the best seller 13 YEARS IN A ROW!
Ford has 5 out of the 10 best sellers.
www.autochannel.com
reviews. www.autorevista.com/articles/mm/ranger.htm
crash test: The Ranger does better in both crach, theft, injury. www2.epix.net
I have already acknowledged that the locker is what give the Tacoma is offroad edge. But for what price? You can have a locker installed on a Ranger for about 1 - 1.5K and still come out ahead.
Also, to achieve the Tacoma's 190HP/220ft/lb of torque you must reach 4800 rpms. This compared to reach the 160hp/225ft/lb of torque on the ranger is 3980rpms. Rev it up baby!
As far as quality at the factory? Please visit www.autochannel.com and see the 18 June 1998 article.
Ford Ranger/Mazda outsell the Tacoma 4 to 1. As I have said, sales do matter. If the Tacoma was so superior why would people opt for the Ranger/Mazda duo? Ok, you state sales don't matter. I guess the Taurus is better than the Camry, even though the Camry outsell the Taurus?.
The consumer makes the decision. More people opt for the Ranger because of its functionality, value, and its fair price. At auto.com the Tacoma doesn't show up ONCE in top sales from 1990 - 1998. The Ranger shows up 4 times. I would think over a 10 year period people would know by now if the Tacoma were so superior.
Spoog, you don't own this truck. After reading more of your earlier posts it shows. See ya!
Vince, did you EVEN read the 4wheeler review?
It wasnt just the locking diff. THE TACOMA
BEAT THE RANGER IN EVERY SINGLE PERFORMANCE CATEGORY, onroad and off.
Every Single performance category!
Get it? Do you GRASP that yet? idiot.
4 wheeler called the tacoma " DOLLAR for DOLLAR
the best all around package of ANY compact truck(maybe any truck)".
It destroyed the Ranger in all performance areas.
Tehy liked the large taco brakes better, the suspension, the shocks, the engie, the trans, the gear ratio, YOU NAME IT.
WHAT ELSE DO YOU FOOLS NEED TO SEE?
Are we discussing 4x2's or 4x4's here?
vince, you own the 4x4. The tacoma has proven to be the much better 4x4.
As for the 44 recalls, the reason some were repeated is because FORD never bothered to fix them the first year.
Why are you still posting these meaningless links?
DO ANY OF THESE LINKS HAVE PERFORMANCE AND OFFROAD RATINGS IN A TACOMS VS> RANGER COMPARISON?
Isnt that the subject of this group, ford vs. Ranger?
Like I said, the ranger is a nice truck. But it is no Tacoma. You can post all the cheezy "reviews" you want. I posted a nuts and bolts HARDCORE article concerning mechanical specs, performance specs, and offroad prowess. The Tacoma won in every regard except price.
DEAL WITH IT. That info was from 4wheeler mag,
not bonnies fluff drive.
Do I need to repost the recalls and the 4 wheeler URL again?
hindsite, what IS IT with these guys?
When comparing MACHINES, arent performance stats and statistics the bottom line? Arent these STATS
a telling factor? Sure, we could argue comfort, looks , and fun till the cows come home, but isn't the one solid un-arguable foundation based on the stats and performance of the vehicle?
In the SANE world, thats how it works.
I've had enough. I have PROVED my point that the Tacoma is a Superior 4X4. I refuse to deal
with these fact ignorers and dance-arounders.
They can post all the "catch-up" soft reviews they want. Bottom line, Tacoma beats Ranger in EVERY performance category. Every one, on road and off. That should say it all right there.
A little while someone back and this is out of context but the jist of it. If beating someone at traffic light is maturity. That is a fair enough statement, but then the same can be said of putting a truck on a pedestal and gloating over it. I really don't care if my truck is number one and for me the satisfaction it gives me is utility and pleasure. Like I said to Sushi if you are happy with yours then buy another one. I come here for the sole purpose is that I enjoy a good debate.
" New CAR Test Drive".
Not 4 wheeler offroad, trucks ONLY.
What the hell would someone who test drives lexus and camrys know about offroading.
Did they take apart each vehicke like 4 wheelr did? Did they provide pages of performance stats,
specs, and High quality photos of each vehicles components? No. It is a lousy one page GENERIC review. The web is FULL of those.
Give it up you guys. The 4x4 you purchased is INFERIOR to the Tacoma. Game over. End of discussion.
If you want to talk 4x2's go ahead.
And Vine8 , no one gives a crap about how much a vehicle sells. You can take your pop-culture-junkie ideals somewhere else. Mcdonalds sells
the most hamburgers, but they sure dont MAKE the best hamburgers.
The Performance comparison and the specs are all here for people to see the truth.
Sushi,
Honestly you have a camper on that old pickup and I would expect it to use more gas. Well, you are right that they do not build trucks like that, but then take a good look at the Ford Super Duty trucks.
As for Spoog, sure I agree with you that Tacoma is hands down the best compact 4x4, but Stats are not the bottom line. I think you mentianed something very important. Comfort. You know what will make me buy another B4000 over a tacoma? Comfort and versatility. If I had enough cash, I would buy a Tacoma and a mercedes. But since I don't and I need a cross between something like that, a ranger would suit fine.