honestly, I never said that the Tacoma is the best 4x4 and I don't really care. I just said it was a good truck. Just fun to debate if you get my drift. On the Ford Superduty truck I read that it had once of the best crawl ratios. Personally I find the Superduty look appealing compared to the F150 or F250. Besides it has all that heavy duty things below it that says I am a real truck. No this is not a plug for Ford, but my honest opinion on it.
spoog: Well you are correct. And in the Ranger site my main comment was that you obviously do more off-roading than me. Given the 2 trucks, a serious off-roader organization like Four Wheeler would love the TRD. I did point out many inconsistancies within the article. As I am a professional Quality engineer, that kind of stuff gets my attention and it leads to questioning the rest of the data.
1. They did not get the 4WHL anti-locks right. 2. They did not get the payload pounds right. 3. They did not get the fuel capacity right. 4. They did not get the max towing capacity right. 5. They said they tested an automatic and then under transmissions, listed the spec on a 5 speed manual. 6. They listed in "Options as Tested" off-road pkg on the Ranger which includes the 4.10 rear end and 26575RX16 tires and then under the drive train specs. lists the axcel ratio as 3.73 and under tires lists 235X75R15.
So yes spoog, I will question your source and have provided a source that, in many peoples opinions, is objective, not subjective. The other sources I gave were in my opinion subjective as they are trying to sell a product.
I do not doubt the ability of the TRD and, unlike vince8, would expect a hard run head to head contest by a Ranger with 3.73 gears and standard suspension to be beat soundly by a TRD developed and tweaked by Toyota Racing Division with locking 4.10 rear and off-road suspension. And, the TRD Tacoma did acording to the article. But maybe that was the intended outcome. We may never know.
Now I did ask you what the clearance was under the rear differential punkin. You said it was 12.5". The '99 TRD I measured was 10.5" in that area, good clearance but not what you stated.
I would still like to get some input on my ring and pinion question. What is the advantage/disadvantage of an 8.8" vs 7" ring gear.
Also spoog, if you would, share with us what you gain with the shocks that you have. That would be interesting.
Yeah, the new grille for the Superduty looks mean. The 4x4 Dually scares me when I see it on the road. That is a real truck, but there is no way in hell I would be able to afford one. And if I did, I would be retired and RVing.
cpousnr Well someone certainly goofed on some of those things you mention, but then I guess the test report on each of the vehicles is right I hope. I notice in Spoog's site the Tacoma has 6 lugs, and I had inaccurately assumed that it had 5 lugs. Now on my Pontiac GP it has 8 lugs....then again that was a different time.
What is so interesting about differential? The 8.8" Ford that has been proven. Then again you rarely hear about problems with differentials these days. It was a muscle car problem.
Sushi, The thought enter my mind that about the Superduty Ford. Then said gas prices will never stay low forever. That V-10 loves gas Styling wise I prefer the straight clean cut and not the rounded affect.
ANGER Topic #74 To each his own, my main goal here is to get the damn stigma of all Fords/GM products fall apart after 30 days out of peoples minds!
DISTORTION Topic #112 Also, how about those 800,000 plus Toyota on recall just the other day??? The factual report from Bloomberg's news service, "Toyota will recall 797,707 cars in Japan and 16,500 sold overseas in 84 nations." So divide 16,500 by 84 nations gives you 196 cars per nation.
BUY AMERICAN & WORKING FOR THE JAPANESE Topic #143 wsn, ASSEMBLED in Fremont CA, very different than built. Which stock exchange does Toyota trade on? Where do the profits go?
"I work for a Japanese company and am always improving, or having to modify a robotic system or fix their equipment to meet American standards!
IT DOES NOT HAVE ONE THEN IT HAS ONE Topic #156 The skidplate on the Tacoma is also an option. You guys make it sound like these are standard on the Tacoma! Topic #191 My skidplate is stainless steel, yours plastic or resin on the Tacoma?
Some of this Tacoma vs. Ranger talk is getting inane; they are both good trucks and is it not based on one's personal tastes/likes as to what vehicle anyone buys? I will say this: The F-150 4x4 with ORP and the 5.4l is one tough-looking truck (for those who want a real truck- full sized).
Spoog, you just don't get it. I know you don't own this Tacoma TRD with a supercharger. You would have mentioned it when you FIRST entered the room. You would have started in right away lambasting the Ranger. Your a kid with a dream. I have responded to your 44 NHSTA recalls, half are bogus or repeats and don't even affect the trucks safety or reliability. I posted several sites/reviews and crash tests in comparing the Ranger with the Tacoma, no response. You keep saying you have a clearance advantage, not with my Ranger, maybe a stock Ranger. The 190HP/220ftlbs of Torque you boast of, you need to reach 4800rpms to acheive it, in comparison to the Rangers 3980 rpms to reach 225ft/lbs of torque. You continue to say I am playing catch up. Why has the Ranger been the #1 seller for 10 years now? I believe after 10 years folks would have found the best value if it were the Tacoma. Yes, I did see the Petersons review and the Tacoma doesn't dominate the Ranger the way you wish and believe it does. There are also several technical questions that you fail to answer from another Ranger/Mazda owner in regards to this article. I could add 3K of aftermarket addons and be even in price of a Tacoma TRD, thats my point.
You say the Tacoma has no clearance advantage over Ranger? You are lying.
In the 4 wheeler and petersons tests, the tacoma beat the ranger in every single PERFORMANCE test. EVERY one. What do you say to that? Are those reviewers lying? Not likely.
The tacoma beats the ranger in braking, crawling, ground clearance, o-60, cabin decibel levels, EVERYTHING. It COMPLETELY outclasses the Ranger in every way except price.
There is your Ranger. You get what you pay for.
Dance baby dance!
If the NHSTA recalls for the Ranger are "bogus", why did Ford recall them? Also, you need to get that possible ghost-accleration problem fixed and check to make sure that "explosion" defect is fixed by your local dealer. I would hardly call these recalls " not safety related".
As for your moronic claim that I don't own my truck, get a clue. Its just another way for you to dance around the FACTS I posted. YOu have come up with NOTHING to prove to anyone that the Ranger is better. Nothing. I provided quality control DOCUMENTS and TECHINCAL COMPARISON AND REVIEW DATA that backed up my claim that the Tacoma is a better performance machine than the Ranger. You have not BACKED up ANY of your accusations or claims of the Ranger.
YOu never had a foundation for the b.s. that you spouted. I am done corresponding with your ignorance.
First of all this is regarding off roading period to any 4x4. Clearance is always good to have when you have to air down. I have air down up to 14 psi when things got a bit rough.
Articulation is a factor in off-roading. I know that the Tacoma is good at that.
Second Toyota offers the locker seperate from the TRD and is not exclusively limited to the TRD option.
I took my Ranger down to the Pass, Hitched in the back was my water tank, Well everyone was there waiting for me, There were plenty of CJ's and SUV's
Climb little Ranger gettin ready to strike, Climb little Ranger with all your might, Climb little Ranger gettin ready to strike, Hey little Ranger don't you know your gonna shut them down.
The turn went right you could see 7 Jeeps coming down, The wife moaned that the steep roads hazzards were'nt know, You slapped it in 4 low and dirt and rocks began to spin, Ranger climbed, asked for more and you knew you would win.
Climb little Ranger. . .
The road went up and down you could hear skidplates ding, some places water/mud was flying into the wind, Things that stopped you? No not a thing, Ranger started down to the Sand Dunes and thru the soft sand, two hours gone you hit hard road and looked at your arms and saw they were tanned
Climb little Ranger. . .
Built Ford Tough. Darn right!
The first Tacoma TRD I saw was in a Texaco, parked, in Fort Garland, Colo. It missed a nice day.
By the way, the trip was the full passage of Medano Pass, around 10,000 ft elev., air on the whole time, 50/50 4whl high/low, about 25mi and 2 hours to cross. Total trip 432 miles and I think I will get about 17-18mpg.
Folks, I cannot ask for much more.
A stock Ranger XLT Supercab 4x4, 3.73 rear end, 4.0 l V6 running 85 octane regular. Dinged one skidplate over the right rear end of the suspension bar and one scrape on the fuel skid.
Well I don't recall that song, but always did like the song with the GTO. Nice ad theme "Built Ford tough." It brings me back to the time when Ford had the light bulb and something like its a better idea theme.d
I left Denver full, loaded water at Wescliffe 1,300 lb or so, went to the property and watered trees in 4whl low. Took on 5 gal at Westcliffe. Made the passage over Medano Pass, elev about 10,000 ft. in 4whl low and high. Took on 4 gal at Colo Springs. Just gassed and took on 12.5 gal. Total 21.5 gal and the trip was 457.5 miles, I misread last night. Do the math
21.3mpg
Now there is a post of a 4 wheeler mag that in there test Ranger vs Tacoma said the ranger averaged 14.something and the Tacoma 17.something.
I continue to question that mags data.
I do not question that they liked the Tacoma TRD and rated it #1. But they were so far off on many technical issues, now, in my opinion, gas milage, on the Ranger that I wonder what they tested. I will email them with my concerns.
If you like the Tacoma, buy it. If you like the Ranger, buy it. In my opinion Ranger is a very affordable 4X4 that, so far has met and exceeded my expectations. Consumer Reports, with the exception of 1998 (because it was a new suspension etc design) has check rated Ranger almost every year. A check rating means they feel it is exceptional value for what you pay. It does not mean that it is the best small 4x4. That my frineds is subjective.
Well the gauntlet is down. The pics will be on my web site in maybe a week. If the Tacoma owners can beat what I have just posted, go for it. But have the pictures to backup the statements.
Spoog, TRUCE! You have an impressive vehicle, Toyota put a lot of effort into it. In the 1960's Edward Deming went to Japan and reworked their manufactuing processes to improve quality. He did so because American Industry told him to get lost. He built quality into the Japaneese industy and the results is their impressive auto industry. When America and asked Deming to help them, he first went to Ford.
Have a good hunt in the San Juans. I saw 7 elk and 2 deer in the Wolf Springs area where I will hunt. Wolf Springs leads to Medano Pass. I was scoping out hunting sites, I did not just make the trip to impress you or anyone. It was for me, not my wife, a heck of a fun day!
I was just browsing through these toyota/ranger quarrels.I had a 96 ranger 4x4 which was a great truck and I hated to get rid of it but I had to have a ford lightning so I traded it in.there'a one thing that bothers me I was born in the usa and I am a true american I am a union electrician.I go to jobsites where they're are only american trucks the way it should be.why would you want a truck made by people who bombed pearl harbor,keep america strong and buy american
Because Tacoma is made in America? And Pearl Harbour was a long time ago, and because Jaoanese make the best TV's, Video games, CD Players and other stuff. Hey. Buy the best. American, Japanese, Chinese, German, whatever... who cares, as long as it is good.
I have worked at construction sites and see American & foreign trucks and car in NY.
Spoog definitely going to join forces with you now in this battle. Don't surrender and keep up the good work. NO TRUCE. I saw the light in the Ford Topic discussion.
personally I don't care what anyone buys or uses I happen to have a sony playstation which I think is great and japan is an american ally now.I like the ford product over every other vehicle I've just had good luck with them but I would watch out with any after market stuff you do to your truck because if something breaks down it could null and void any factory warranty you have
just something to throw out there I think in 2002 svt is building an all wheel drive 5.0 V8 ranger supercab offroad vehicle should be interesting but I'm sure it will be pricy
I guess I will close by just offering some of my thoughts on the Ranger, no special order of improtance to me:
HIGH BEAMS: 1. Very competitive price. You do get a lot for what you pay. 2. Roomy for a guy 6'3" 255lb. I set the seat up 2 knotches up from full back and can drive very well even further. 3. Economical. My mileage I have posted is what I got. Lowest ever 16.4 best ever 25. 4. Rear seating, while not good, is better than the Tacoma. My 6'2" son can fit there. Head room better than Tacoma by I think 3 inches. 5. The 4x4 will preform in its enviroment. Are there places it cannot go? Sure there are. But it will take passes/trails listed as difficult in a stock condition. 6. Reliable enough for me. When you have to fix a Tacoma, if my experience on 2 '87 Celica's is and indication, parts are not cheap. There are a lot of Rangers and parts seem reasonable. 7. Consumer Reports continues to list the vehicle very high in many of the areas it reports based on owner inputs and their tests. LOW BEAMS: 1. Horn sound sucks. 2. Clearance could be better. They could re-design those shock bottoms. I am impressed by the Tacoma in this aspect. 3. Plastic grill chips easier than I think it should. 4. Take a hint from Toyota and get something like the TRD option. I am impressed. 5. Rear sliding window, in my opinion, not real functional. That is why I opted not to get one.
UNKNOWN BEAMS: 1. Not limited to the Ranger or Tacoma but I just wonder about the reliability of the vacume hubs. I believe if you want to do heavy 4 wheeling, get manual locking hubs.
My last 4 wheeler, a '71 Land Cruiser had locking Warn hubs. Pain when they froze but never failed.
I am just real uncertain about that type of hub.
Any thoughts?
Hey hindsite, the majority of complaints on the Ranger site are querks on the 3.0 engine. Be informed and buy the 4.0!
I think the reaar sliding window is a great option... When it is open and the windown is open, you have ventilationg coming in from both windows. Sucking in from the back and front. It is pretty neat.
I am tired of offering sites/reviews that support the Ranger to people who don't read them. My main points are: 1. The Ranger is more equal than some wish to believe. 2. The Ranger cost less option for option. This is no secret. 3. I have never said the Ranger was better than the Tacoma. 4. I have acknowledged the locker offered by Toyota and have researched it, and have yet to find someone who dislikes it. But my question is at what price? Aftermarket lockers are offered for Rangers at far less if you want one. 5. I still don't understand how the Ranger could remain the best selling compact truck for almost 10 years straight if it were so terrible? Don't consumers make the choice? Why isn't the Tacoma #1 in sales if it is so superior after 10 years? Spoog, you and I know you don't own the truck, it shows in previous entries. See you in the hills
Reality check. Just wanted to know how far off the wall it is to rant about the Tacoma or the Ranger in the previous post. T Cpousnr, I was wondering what the heck you were talking about 3.0 engine so I went back and found the question I had asked you concerning a buddy of mine has one. "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." I knew he had the 3.0 engine. Why would I buy a 4.0? You mean you want me to tell my buddy to junk the 3.0 now and buy the 4.0 engine?
Spoog- Does everything have to be a contest with your Toyota? Of course your Tacoma can get through smaller trails than a F150 4x4- it is a much smaller truck. The F150 is a damn good off-roader according to many that I have talked to (against other full-sized PU's, of course). I will say this though: The big Ford is a better value than the Tacoma. Alot more truck for 3-4K more (Lariat vs. Limited). Spoog- your Tacoma is a fine truck; quit the "My daddy is tougher than your daddy talk."
your right, the f150 is a good truck./ Much better now than it was 4 years ago. I like the looks of the f250. You can get a decently equiped 150 for 24$.
I wonder if they still have that "overpowered steering to death" feeling when driving them.
I hope they improved the rotors and brakes to.
Alot of people in my family have the Ford full size. There not bad trucks.
hindsite: No no one need junk a 3.0. I was just commenting that there were some documented problems with pinging in earlier posts. One in particular had tried the higher octane with no improvment. My comment regarding the 4.0 was for the extra 600 bucks you get the better power and, at least mine, seems to run real fine, even at altitude, with 85 octane fuel. Just talked to a friend of mine about my trip. He owns a Wrangler and strongly suggested I use premium if I go up again.
Do not get me worng, the pass I was on was not the worst in the state by a wide margin. But it did offer a challenge and had the diversity that I refered to. The sand was the biggest challenge, almost stalled in the soft sand but I just put it to the floor in 2nd and kept going. I would have been dead if I had stopped!
I checked on a 4.10 locker for the Ranger and installed with compressor to lock/unlock was over 2K. I am not that interested!
Spoog, for the Tacoma TRD to offer what they do for around 2K is impressive. If I were more into pure 4 wheeling the TRD would be tempting. I still feel my Ranger can hold it's own with the Tacoma or Tacoma SR5. They are both fine trucks. By the way, reading more about the Ford Rear-ends, I think the Ranger is a 7.7 inch, not 8.8. Anyway the Toyota has a sweet streamlined design with their 7 inch.
Now I have heard about a Ranger SVT that packs a 5.0 Liter V8. Hmmmm a real challenge for the TRD!
Anybody know how RS9000 shocks compare to Bilstines? Can't remember the manufacturer just the model. They make an RS5000 non-adjustable and an RS9000 5 way adjustable. They were recommended to me over the Bilstines and cost about $65 here in Denver.
Sushi: Understand about the window but when opened, I could only stick my fingers out about 5 inches and the opening is about half the size of the one I had on my 81 Toyota truck. Other than the ventilation I did not think it was functional. When I had the 81, my kids would be back in the bed under the topper. I had built a wooden insert that I padded and put rugs on. Worked ok then cause the truck was just a long bed.
If you are talking about the ARB locker it is the wiring & placement of the air hose line is a pain. Honestly there are lockers out there like the Detroit Locker that is way cheaper and less difficult to install then the ARB. I have never liked the ARB because the air hose runs at the underside of the truck and then you need a place to put the air compressor unit.
It would seem I have a problem with my homepage. It was created on AOL 3.0 and I upgraded to AOL 4.0. Got the pics back and they are great, a bit dark but great. Hmmm what to do. . .
Yeah AOL 4.0 will not let me edit the old page. Well I'll think of something. May have to build a whole new homepage.
Want to correct an error I stated. The Tacoma is an 8" rear-end, 7.5" front Independent Front suspension. The Ranger changed from a 7.8" rear to an 8.8" rear in 1998. They, Ford, claim that the 8.8 is 35% stronger than the 7.8. Makes sense, bigger gears, stronger gears.
So the answer is the smaller rear-end has less strength but better clearance. But strength I think is relitive here. Tacomas seem to do fine.
The August issue of Four Wheeler Magazine rated the "Top 10 Best Buys in 4 Wheel Drive". Under the heading of Best Buy Compact Extended Cab Pickup the winner was:
Ford Ranger XL 3.0
It did state that if you get the 4.0l option for $660 it includes 4 wheel disk brakes free.
A lot of strenght has to do with metallurgy and the strenght of materials. Unless you know what are the physical properties of the gears and misc. you are making a blanket statement unproven. Same could be said the 3.4 engine is smaller than the 4.0 engine, so the 4.0 engine has more horsepower. Wrong assumption. Honestly, if you have the information I would like to see it. What kind of metal or alloy? What is the capacity to withstand static load? What is the resistance to permanent deformation? What is the toughness of material under shock loading? What is the useful life of a material under cyclic loading? What is the material's elevated temperature behavior? What are the metallurgical variables in the materials response to stresses? Actually I am quite interested, but if you can get the data I will tell you which is better.
I have the magazine of the red Ranger on page 50. Are you sure they are right this time Cpousnr. Well it is a good short article on the Ranger. If you look in the magazine they have ads from various companies that list the Detroit locker and the prices.
Hindsite: I so not disagree. I just stated what is posted regarding the Ford strength difference between the 7.5 vs 8.8. http://www.therangerstation.cjb.net/
That is why I said it is relitive, by that I ment relitive to the Ranger 7.5 vs 8.8. No doubt a bigger gear of cheaper metal will not be as strong. But given simular material a larger gear would have, I think, a meshing advantage over a smaller gear. That is where I was coming from.
I found the reason specs did not jive in the article spoog provided. They tested a Tacoma extra cab vs a Ford short bed. The differences make sense now. What I do not know is if the same drive gear setup is on the short and long bed. I would assume it is but I do not know.
Well I misread your post. Thought you were talking about the differentials still in the Ranger and Tacoma. My error. Anyway went to your site posted and checked the rear axle. I do know that the 8.8" has been around since the late 70's and was used in the F150 and Broncos. It is a proven design that I guess is used in the Explorer and Ranger these days. Really the important thing is the gear ratio. Generally as the gear ratio increases the pinon and ring decreases proportionally.
Well now that I have seen all the male reviews by men here is one a review from a woman concerning the Ranger.
hindsite: I was just rehashing what was at the site. Yes I knew it had been around a while. Have no idea why they stated putting them in the Ranger. Seems like overkill.
spoog: Ok to the 4 wheeler: They say they drove all the vehicles, each staffer got a vote. They say that that all the specs and their opinion should be a good starting point for anyone looking for the most 4 wheel value. Then depending on your own preferences and needs make your own best-buy pick. "...the best truck for you is the one that serves each and every one of your own pastimes."
Hmmm, profound!
Chevy S10/Sonoma SL, Dodge Dakota, Ranger XL, Isuzu Hombre, Mazda B3000, Nissan King Cab Frontier and Tacoma XtraCab. "Possibly the most price-sensitive category around compact p/u are used in all kinds of driving situations...To do that they have to be versatile and...they can not shy away from heavy work. With that in mind our...experts debated the strengths and merits of each truck. In the end however pricing became the key element in the final tally tipping the scales in the Ford's favor. Combined with the lowest sticker, Ranger offers the best interior bang for the buck with a decent 3L V6, not to be ordered with the automatic however. In addition a few fine print readers liked the fact that if they were to spend $675 on the 4L V6 they would get 4 wheel disc brakes thrown in and the option to buy a 5 sp automatic...Finally one tester spoke in favor ot the Nissan noting its back to basics approach to the smooth riding suspension and no frills interior." Tacoma was the 2.7 4 with 3.42 gears($340 for a rear locker option a great price), Ranger 3.0 v6 with 3.73 and Nissan 2.4L 4 with 4.38(yowser!) S10 was highest sticker at 20,483, Tacoma 19,458 and Ranger 17,785 (Hmmm more than I paid for my XLT 4 L).
I guess they were all very close. Would have been nice to see the scores but they were not listed.
Try em all, buy what fits your needs.
Going to try Music Pass down in the Sangres this weekend (wife said she will stay at the camp this time, thank you and then wondered aloud if my insurance was paid up). Going to take asa 400 this time.
My son borrowed the truck for a day. He found a way to lower my gas mileage.
OK I LOOKED HARD AT THE FORD AND AT THE TACOMA...AFTER ALL WAS SAID AND DONE THE TACOMA V6 EXTENDED CAB WITH THE TRD OFF ROAD PACK WON HANDS DOWN...QUALITY MAY BE JOB ONE FOR FORDS ADVERTISING SLOGAN BUT WHEN I DROP 21K OF MY HARD EARNED MONEY, THE TOYOTA WINS EVERY TIME. I HAVE A 1990 TOYOTA AND ITS NEVER BEEN BACK TO THE DEALER SINCE I GOT IT. I HAVE NEVER KNOWN A FORD OWNER THAT HAS HAD THE SAME EXPERIENCE.
The more I read and hear its sounds as though Toyota is dropping its price on the Tacoma line. This was forcasted months back due to the release of the Tundra. The Tacoma TRD was a pricey package. 21K is the lowest I have heard for a TRD yet. I guess it is what you want/need in a truck that matters. If you want to pay the extra 2-3K for a locker rear end, thats a personal choice.
Have a good 4th of July everyone and know what it means. As for me I am going to Fall River, Mass. to see those 16 inch guns on the battleship Massachusetts my dad designed for the Navy.
hindsite, I went to see the USS North Carolina recently and taged along with an unofficial tour by a former crew member. Those ships are amazing. Wish I could remember the fuel mileage quoted. It seems like the gun turrets,if that's the right term, were about a foot or more thick steel. I believe when the USS NC was built during WW II their was a lot of controversy over it being a "luxury ship". Wonder if any of the parts came out of the Ford plant back then?
trent: According to the article in Four Wheeler they are offering 4 wheel DIKS brakes on the Ranger XL if you buy the 4.0 v6 option.
That is all I know.
Also, was on the USS New Jersey one time when it was still active and pulled into North Island. Impressive ship, teak decks. Quite a thrill for an old airdale Chief. If you get to Mobile the Alabama is worth the trip. At Houston the USS Texas is from the 1920's but has been nicely restored. It is the same class as the USS Arizona.
In Denver this weekend they were offering the following on Tacoma xcab. Do not know if it was with TRD option but it said it was loaded.
Dealer price: 23,510 Toyota discount: 1,600 Stevenson discount: 2,276 your cash: 1,000 Stevenson matching: 1,000 balance: 17,634
So basically the truck was going for 18,634. Pretty competitive but since no one sells something for nothing it could appear that the profit margin on Tacoma's may have been set a bit high earlier in the year.
Comments
Well you are correct. And in the Ranger site my main comment was that you obviously do more off-roading than me. Given the 2 trucks, a serious off-roader organization like Four Wheeler would love the TRD.
I did point out many inconsistancies within the article. As I am a professional Quality engineer, that kind of stuff gets my attention and it leads to questioning the rest of the data.
1. They did not get the 4WHL anti-locks right.
2. They did not get the payload pounds right.
3. They did not get the fuel capacity right.
4. They did not get the max towing capacity right.
5. They said they tested an automatic and then under transmissions, listed the spec on a 5 speed manual.
6. They listed in "Options as Tested" off-road pkg on the Ranger which includes the 4.10 rear end and 26575RX16 tires and then under the drive train specs. lists the axcel ratio as 3.73 and under tires lists 235X75R15.
So yes spoog, I will question your source and have provided a source that, in many peoples opinions, is objective, not subjective. The other sources I gave were in my opinion subjective as they are trying to sell a product.
I do not doubt the ability of the TRD and, unlike vince8, would expect a hard run head to head contest by a Ranger with 3.73 gears and standard suspension to be beat soundly by a TRD developed and tweaked by Toyota Racing Division with locking 4.10 rear and off-road suspension. And, the TRD Tacoma did acording to the article. But maybe that was the intended outcome. We may never know.
Now I did ask you what the clearance was under the rear differential punkin. You said it was 12.5". The '99 TRD I measured was 10.5" in that area, good clearance but not what you stated.
I would still like to get some input on my ring and pinion question. What is the advantage/disadvantage of an 8.8" vs 7" ring gear.
Also spoog, if you would, share with us what you gain with the shocks that you have. That would be interesting.
Well someone certainly goofed on some of those things you mention, but then I guess the test report on each of the vehicles is right I hope. I notice in Spoog's site the Tacoma has 6 lugs, and I had inaccurately assumed that it had 5 lugs. Now on my Pontiac GP it has 8 lugs....then again that was a different time.
What is so interesting about differential? The 8.8" Ford that has been proven. Then again you rarely hear about problems with differentials these days. It was a muscle car problem.
Sushi,
The thought enter my mind that about the Superduty Ford. Then said gas prices will never stay low forever. That V-10 loves gas
I don't
Topic #74
To each his own, my main goal here is to get the
damn stigma of all Fords/GM products fall apart
after 30 days out of peoples minds!
DISTORTION
Topic #112
Also, how about those 800,000 plus Toyota on
recall just the other day???
The factual report from Bloomberg's news service, "Toyota will recall 797,707 cars in Japan and 16,500 sold overseas in 84 nations." So divide 16,500 by 84 nations gives you 196 cars per nation.
BUY AMERICAN & WORKING FOR THE JAPANESE
Topic #143
wsn, ASSEMBLED in Fremont CA, very different than built. Which stock exchange does Toyota trade on? Where do the profits go?
"I work for a Japanese company and am always improving, or having to modify a robotic system or fix their equipment to meet American standards!
IT DOES NOT HAVE ONE THEN IT HAS ONE
Topic #156
The skidplate on the Tacoma is also an option. You guys make it sound like these are standard on the Tacoma!
Topic #191
My skidplate is stainless steel, yours plastic or resin on the Tacoma?
Facts:
44 recalls for ranger, 7 for Toyota pickup
89-99
better 4x4 components on Tacoma, beats Ranger in every single performance category
"dollar for dollar the best all around package of any compact pickup(or maybe any truck)."----4 wheeler magazine.
lol.
playing catch-up is no fun. At least admit the Tacoma is thebetter 4x4 like the rest of em' did, and be on your way.
I have responded to your 44 NHSTA recalls, half are bogus or repeats and don't even affect the trucks safety or reliability. I posted several sites/reviews and crash tests in comparing the Ranger with the Tacoma, no response. You keep saying you have a clearance advantage, not with my Ranger, maybe a stock Ranger. The 190HP/220ftlbs of Torque you boast of, you need to reach 4800rpms to acheive it, in comparison to the Rangers 3980 rpms to reach 225ft/lbs of torque.
You continue to say I am playing catch up. Why has the Ranger been the #1 seller for 10 years now? I believe after 10 years folks would have found the best value if it were the Tacoma.
Yes, I did see the Petersons review and the Tacoma doesn't dominate the Ranger the way you wish and believe it does. There are also several technical questions that you fail to answer from another Ranger/Mazda owner in regards to this article.
I could add 3K of aftermarket addons and be even in price of a Tacoma TRD, thats my point.
You say the Tacoma has no clearance advantage
over Ranger? You are lying.
In the 4 wheeler and petersons tests,
the tacoma beat the ranger in every single PERFORMANCE test. EVERY one. What do you say to that? Are those reviewers lying? Not likely.
The tacoma beats the ranger in braking, crawling, ground clearance, o-60, cabin decibel levels,
EVERYTHING. It COMPLETELY outclasses the Ranger in every way except price.
There is your Ranger.
You get what you pay for.
Dance baby dance!
If the NHSTA recalls for the Ranger are "bogus",
why did Ford recall them? Also, you need
to get that possible ghost-accleration problem fixed and check to make sure that "explosion" defect is fixed by your local dealer. I would hardly call these recalls " not safety related".
As for your moronic claim that I don't own my truck, get a clue. Its just another way for you to dance around the FACTS I posted. YOu have come up with NOTHING to prove to anyone that the Ranger is better. Nothing. I provided quality control DOCUMENTS and TECHINCAL COMPARISON AND REVIEW DATA that backed up my claim that the Tacoma is a better performance machine than the Ranger. You have not BACKED up ANY of your accusations or claims of the Ranger.
YOu never had a foundation for the b.s. that you spouted. I am done corresponding with your
ignorance.
Dance baby dance!
Articulation is a factor in off-roading. I know that the Tacoma is good at that.
Second Toyota offers the locker seperate from the TRD and is not exclusively limited to the TRD option.
To paraphrase and JAN and DEAN from the 60's:
I took my Ranger down to the Pass,
Hitched in the back was my water tank,
Well everyone was there waiting for me,
There were plenty of CJ's and SUV's
Climb little Ranger gettin ready to strike,
Climb little Ranger with all your might,
Climb little Ranger gettin ready to strike,
Hey little Ranger don't you know your gonna shut them down.
The turn went right you could see 7 Jeeps coming down,
The wife moaned that the steep roads hazzards were'nt know,
You slapped it in 4 low and dirt and rocks began to spin,
Ranger climbed, asked for more and you knew you would win.
Climb little Ranger. . .
The road went up and down you could hear skidplates ding,
some places water/mud was flying into the wind,
Things that stopped you? No not a thing,
Ranger started down to the Sand Dunes and thru the soft sand,
two hours gone you hit hard road and looked at your arms
and saw they were tanned
Climb little Ranger. . .
Built Ford Tough. Darn right!
The first Tacoma TRD I saw was in a Texaco, parked, in Fort Garland, Colo. It missed a nice day.
Total trip 432 miles and I think I will get about 17-18mpg.
Folks, I cannot ask for much more.
A stock Ranger XLT Supercab 4x4, 3.73 rear end, 4.0 l V6 running 85 octane regular. Dinged one skidplate over the right rear end of the suspension bar and one scrape on the fuel skid.
So where were the Tacoma's over the weekend?!?
I left Denver full, loaded water at Wescliffe 1,300 lb or so, went to the property and watered trees in 4whl low. Took on 5 gal at Westcliffe. Made the passage over Medano Pass, elev about 10,000 ft. in 4whl low and high. Took on 4 gal at Colo Springs. Just gassed and took on 12.5 gal. Total 21.5 gal and the trip was 457.5 miles, I misread last night. Do the math
21.3mpg
Now there is a post of a 4 wheeler mag that in there test Ranger vs Tacoma said the ranger averaged 14.something and the Tacoma 17.something.
I continue to question that mags data.
I do not question that they liked the Tacoma TRD and rated it #1. But they were so far off on many technical issues, now, in my opinion, gas milage, on the Ranger that I wonder what they tested. I will email them with my concerns.
If you like the Tacoma, buy it. If you like the Ranger, buy it. In my opinion Ranger is a very affordable 4X4 that, so far has met and exceeded my expectations. Consumer Reports, with the exception of 1998 (because it was a new suspension etc design) has check rated Ranger almost every year. A check rating means they feel it is exceptional value for what you pay. It does not mean that it is the best small 4x4. That my frineds is subjective.
Well the gauntlet is down. The pics will be on my web site in maybe a week. If the Tacoma owners can beat what I have just posted, go for it. But have the pictures to backup the statements.
Spoog, TRUCE! You have an impressive vehicle, Toyota put a lot of effort into it. In the 1960's Edward Deming went to Japan and reworked their manufactuing processes to improve quality. He did so because American Industry told him to get lost. He built quality into the Japaneese industy and the results is their impressive auto industry. When America and asked Deming to help them, he first went to Ford.
Have a good hunt in the San Juans. I saw 7 elk and 2 deer in the Wolf Springs area where I will hunt. Wolf Springs leads to Medano Pass. I was scoping out hunting sites, I did not just make the trip to impress you or anyone. It was for me, not my wife, a heck of a fun day!
I have worked at construction sites and see American & foreign trucks and car in NY.
Spoog definitely going to join forces with you now in this battle. Don't surrender and keep up the good work. NO TRUCE. I saw the light in the Ford Topic discussion.
HIGH BEAMS:
1. Very competitive price. You do get a lot for what you pay.
2. Roomy for a guy 6'3" 255lb. I set the seat up 2 knotches up from full back and can drive very well even further.
3. Economical. My mileage I have posted is what I got. Lowest ever 16.4 best ever 25.
4. Rear seating, while not good, is better than the Tacoma. My 6'2" son can fit there. Head room better than Tacoma by I think 3 inches.
5. The 4x4 will preform in its enviroment. Are there places it cannot go? Sure there are. But it will take passes/trails listed as difficult in a stock condition.
6. Reliable enough for me. When you have to fix a Tacoma, if my experience on 2 '87 Celica's is and indication, parts are not cheap. There are a lot of Rangers and parts seem reasonable.
7. Consumer Reports continues to list the vehicle very high in many of the areas it reports based on owner inputs and their tests.
LOW BEAMS:
1. Horn sound sucks.
2. Clearance could be better. They could re-design those shock bottoms. I am impressed by the Tacoma in this aspect.
3. Plastic grill chips easier than I think it should.
4. Take a hint from Toyota and get something like the TRD option. I am impressed.
5. Rear sliding window, in my opinion, not real functional. That is why I opted not to get one.
UNKNOWN BEAMS:
1. Not limited to the Ranger or Tacoma but I just wonder about the reliability of the vacume hubs. I believe if you want to do heavy 4 wheeling, get manual locking hubs.
My last 4 wheeler, a '71 Land Cruiser had locking Warn hubs. Pain when they froze but never failed.
I am just real uncertain about that type of hub.
Any thoughts?
Hey hindsite, the majority of complaints on the Ranger site are querks on the 3.0 engine. Be informed and buy the 4.0!
"But these are just my opinions and I could be wrong!"
Have a great day guys.
I have to take my wife to dinner. Thru the trip yesterday I kept hearing this vioce, sometimes quivering say:
"Your gonna owe me big time for this Jack!"
Guess my name changed too!
My main points are:
1. The Ranger is more equal than some wish to believe.
2. The Ranger cost less option for option. This is no secret.
3. I have never said the Ranger was better than the Tacoma.
4. I have acknowledged the locker offered by Toyota and have researched it, and have yet to find someone who dislikes it. But my question is at what price? Aftermarket lockers are offered for Rangers at far less if you want one.
5. I still don't understand how the Ranger could remain the best selling compact truck for almost 10 years straight if it were so terrible? Don't consumers make the choice? Why isn't the Tacoma #1 in sales if it is so superior after 10 years?
Spoog, you and I know you don't own the truck, it shows in previous entries.
See you in the hills
-wsn
Cpousnr,
I was wondering what the heck you were talking about 3.0 engine so I went back and found the question I had asked you concerning a buddy of mine has one. "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." I knew he had the 3.0 engine. Why would I buy a 4.0? You mean you want me to tell my buddy to junk the 3.0 now and buy the 4.0 engine?
150 for 24$.
I wonder if they still have that "overpowered steering to death" feeling when driving them.
I hope they improved the rotors and brakes to.
Alot of people in my family have the Ford full size. There not bad trucks.
No no one need junk a 3.0. I was just commenting that there were some documented problems with pinging in earlier posts. One in particular had tried the higher octane with no improvment. My comment regarding the 4.0 was for the extra 600 bucks you get the better power and, at least mine, seems to run real fine, even at altitude, with 85 octane fuel. Just talked to a friend of mine about my trip. He owns a Wrangler and strongly suggested I use premium if I go up again.
Do not get me worng, the pass I was on was not the worst in the state by a wide margin. But it did offer a challenge and had the diversity that I refered to. The sand was the biggest challenge, almost stalled in the soft sand but I just put it to the floor in 2nd and kept going. I would have been dead if I had stopped!
I checked on a 4.10 locker for the Ranger and installed with compressor to lock/unlock was over 2K. I am not that interested!
Spoog, for the Tacoma TRD to offer what they do for around 2K is impressive. If I were more into pure 4 wheeling the TRD would be tempting. I still feel my Ranger can hold it's own with the Tacoma or Tacoma SR5. They are both fine trucks. By the way, reading more about the Ford Rear-ends, I think the Ranger is a 7.7 inch, not 8.8. Anyway the Toyota has a sweet streamlined design with their 7 inch.
Now I have heard about a Ranger SVT that packs a 5.0 Liter V8. Hmmmm a real challenge for the TRD!
Anybody know how RS9000 shocks compare to Bilstines? Can't remember the manufacturer just the model. They make an RS5000 non-adjustable and an RS9000 5 way adjustable. They were recommended to me over the Bilstines and cost about $65 here in Denver.
Sushi:
Understand about the window but when opened, I could only stick my fingers out about 5 inches and the opening is about half the size of the one I had on my 81 Toyota truck. Other than the ventilation I did not think it was functional. When I had the 81, my kids would be back in the bed under the topper. I had built a wooden insert that I padded and put rugs on. Worked ok then cause the truck was just a long bed.
It would seem I have a problem with my homepage. It was created on AOL 3.0 and I upgraded to AOL 4.0. Got the pics back and they are great, a bit dark but great. Hmmm what to do. . .
Want to correct an error I stated. The Tacoma is an 8" rear-end, 7.5" front Independent Front suspension. The Ranger changed from a 7.8" rear to an 8.8" rear in 1998. They, Ford, claim that the 8.8 is 35% stronger than the 7.8.
Makes sense, bigger gears, stronger gears.
So the answer is the smaller rear-end has less strength but better clearance. But strength I think is relitive here. Tacomas seem to do fine.
Ford Ranger XL 3.0
It did state that if you get the 4.0l option for $660 it includes 4 wheel disk brakes free.
I have the magazine of the red Ranger on page 50. Are you sure they are right this time Cpousnr. Well it is a good short article on the Ranger. If you look in the magazine they have ads from various companies that list the Detroit locker and the prices.
I so not disagree. I just stated what is posted regarding the Ford strength difference between the
7.5 vs 8.8. http://www.therangerstation.cjb.net/
That is why I said it is relitive, by that I ment relitive to the Ranger 7.5 vs 8.8. No doubt a
bigger gear of cheaper metal will not be as
strong. But given simular material a larger gear
would have, I think, a meshing advantage over a
smaller gear. That is where I was coming from.
I found the reason specs did not jive in the article spoog provided. They tested a Tacoma extra cab vs a Ford short bed. The differences make sense now. What I do not know is if the same drive gear setup is on the short and long bed. I would assume it is but I do not know.
Well now that I have seen all the male reviews by men here is one a review from a woman concerning the Ranger.
http://www.womanmotorist.com/review/ford/jb-ford-ranger-1.shtml
I was just rehashing what was at the site. Yes I knew it had been around a while. Have no idea why they stated putting them in the Ranger. Seems like overkill.
spoog:
Ok to the 4 wheeler:
They say they drove all the vehicles, each staffer got a vote. They say that that all the specs and their opinion should be a good starting point for anyone looking for the most 4 wheel value. Then depending on your own preferences and needs make your own best-buy pick.
"...the best truck for you is the one that serves each and every one of your own pastimes."
Hmmm, profound!
Chevy S10/Sonoma SL, Dodge Dakota, Ranger XL, Isuzu Hombre, Mazda B3000, Nissan King Cab Frontier and Tacoma XtraCab.
"Possibly the most price-sensitive category around compact p/u are used in all kinds of driving situations...To do that they have to be versatile and...they can not shy away from heavy work. With that in mind our...experts debated the strengths and merits of each truck. In the end however pricing became the key element in the final tally tipping the scales in the Ford's favor.
Combined with the lowest sticker, Ranger offers the best interior bang for the buck with a decent 3L V6, not to be ordered with the automatic however. In addition a few fine print readers liked the fact that if they were to spend $675 on the 4L V6 they would get 4 wheel disc brakes thrown in and the option to buy a 5 sp automatic...Finally one tester spoke in favor ot the Nissan noting its back to basics approach to the smooth riding suspension and no frills interior."
Tacoma was the 2.7 4 with 3.42 gears($340 for a rear locker option a great price), Ranger 3.0 v6 with 3.73 and Nissan 2.4L 4 with 4.38(yowser!) S10 was highest sticker at 20,483, Tacoma 19,458 and Ranger 17,785 (Hmmm more than I paid for my XLT 4 L).
I guess they were all very close. Would have been nice to see the scores but they were not listed.
Try em all, buy what fits your needs.
Going to try Music Pass down in the Sangres this weekend (wife said she will stay at the camp this time, thank you and then wondered aloud if my insurance was paid up). Going to take asa 400 this time.
My son borrowed the truck for a day. He found a way to lower my gas mileage.
Hmm, a babe mobile!
I dont know that TRD Tacoma looks pretty mean.
You know my kids when they dirve it seem to alway get the girls following them. . .
By the way, someone on the Ranger site refered to the ranger as "its cheap".
I would use the phrase "less expensive" but then it depends if you want to provoke or inform.
I guess it is what you want/need in a truck that matters. If you want to pay the extra 2-3K for a locker rear end, thats a personal choice.
I believe when the USS NC was built during WW II their was a lot of controversy over it being a "luxury ship". Wonder if any of the parts came out of the Ford plant back then?
According to the article in Four Wheeler they are offering 4 wheel DIKS brakes on the Ranger XL if you buy the 4.0 v6 option.
That is all I know.
Also, was on the USS New Jersey one time when it was still active and pulled into North Island. Impressive ship, teak decks. Quite a thrill for an old airdale Chief. If you get to Mobile the Alabama is worth the trip. At Houston the USS Texas is from the 1920's but has been nicely restored. It is the same class as the USS Arizona.
In Denver this weekend they were offering the following on Tacoma xcab. Do not know if it was with TRD option but it said it was loaded.
Dealer price: 23,510
Toyota discount: 1,600
Stevenson discount: 2,276
your cash: 1,000
Stevenson matching: 1,000
balance: 17,634
So basically the truck was going for 18,634. Pretty competitive but since no one sells something for nothing it could appear that the profit margin on Tacoma's may have been set a bit high earlier in the year.