Starts on the east side sign, on top @10,000 next to the summit sign, the valley leading to the west, at the Sand Dunes on west side, looking back to the cut I came down and on my property working. It takes a coulpe of min. to load. On the bottom is a 400K file of the launch of the Cassini spacecraft to Saturn, highly detailed.
Well I don't know if they came out of GM, Dodge, or Ford. Whatever those ships built back then are still very impressive today. Actually the battleship Mass. I saw was disappointing. From a distance she looks great, but when you get up close you can see the deterioration in the steel and the general lack of maintenance. Well, I will have to ask my dad if he remembers the USS North Carolina.
Lovely scenes of the terrain there in Colorodo and your truck of course Reminds me of Vt & NH the background. Anyway went to Bennington, Vermont to stay at the family's summer house after the visit to the battleship. Saw a lot of Toyotas and Rangers pickup trucks in Vt. Well, good to see that they get along just fine:) Did drive up to a top of a mountain to an elevation of about 3,472 ft and the truck did well. Since, it was so hot & humid like a 110 degrees at the base I turned off the AC just to make sure she would not over heat on the way up.
Well going to play with my strumstick(string instrument). Anyone have any preference on part time 4 wheel drive vs all wheel drive?
I prefer part time. I guess I see no real need for full time when I am in the city, or just driving on the freeway. Why would you need full time 4wheel drive in a city? or in the burbs? In the NW, there are also a lot of Rangers and Toyotas. Actually, these two pretty much dominate! I just don't see very many Frontiers or S-10's here. Hind, you sure do have a heat wave going on out there. Hear a lot of people are having a hard time, especially the elderly. They are saying the West is next. Keep cool.
rustyle1: So we are still in the neighborhood of $20,000+ for a TRD equipped Tacoma?
hindsite: My driveway is at about 5,700'. . . (just gotta rib a bit. . . Thanks, I do need to travel with someone to have them get some pics with me driving. On the next to last picture you see the cut in the middle to the south side of the large mountain (around 12,600' I think. That is where I came and it is about 12 miles from the top down to where I took the pic. The creek runs down that cut and you cross it about 10 times, 3 bumper deep. You cannot see her too well but I had a real pissed off wife sitting in the cab! Final picture on the property shows 4 14,000'peaks and the land is at about 8,200'.
Vince, Well hope it will not be as hot in the West as it was over here. Yeah, I was surveying the subway tunnels in NYC Tuesday and it must have been like 125 degrees in the tunnels. Hope to finish this job soon and head back to home to New Hampshire to relax. Actually the Toyotas that I saw were mostly pre-Tacomas and the Rangers were from 1994 to the present. Did see at least 3 Frontiers, but they seem like a rarity here in the East coast. Ditto for NH also.
I wonder if those AWD suv's are really that good off roading. I guess those that have AWD that don't have the center lock must have a difficult time off roading. Ford has been heading that direction with AWD and wonder if they plan to take it to the truck line. Okay one more question did Mazda have any input in the Ranger design?
Cpousnr, Your web site does not exist anymore concerning the Ranger. Well, unfortunately I didn't drive up a driveway Did stop on the way up and picked up some nice granite boulders for landscaping. Actually I did see a person sitting in the passenger side of your truck. A box of Godiva Chocolates and roses always works to soothe the ladies.
Well, the Toyota Land Cruiser, arguably the best offroader ever made(production) uses full time 4 wheel drive. So does the higher end Jeep GrandCherokee and the 4runner limited.
yeah, I'll argue with you, you forget the Range Rover???. I never said I hated Toyota's spoog. I never even said the Tacoma was a terrible truck either. I just rebuted you claims that all Rangers/Mazda's are "grocery getters" will fall apart, are terrible trucks, cheap, ect...
Someone mentioned the USS North Carolina in a previous post. She was built during WWII in Norfolk, Va according to my dad. At almost 90 his memory is a bit faded, but he does remember her and she was capable of cruising at 35 knots or 50 mph.
Spoog I really doubt that the Land Cruiser is one of the best stock off road vehicles ever made. Do you think I am going to listen to a fledgling that harangues when confronted with a view dissimilar to his.
I'm looking at getting a new truck in the next month or so and have been following this discussion with great interest as I'm teetering between the Tacoma and Ranger. If I got the Tacoma, I think I'd hold off on the TRD package and use the money( and then some) to get the rear locker and the supercharger. I figure I could add the rest later if I needed it. Anyone see any holes in this? I think I can get the Tacoma configured the way I want it for around 22-23k with the charger.
Go to any offroad clun or Mag and they will tell you the Landcruiser, Jeep, and Range Rover are the best stock offroad vehicles. I believe the Landcruiser comes with a front, center, and rear locking differential(3), automatic interior tire deflation with the push of a button in the cockpit, the highest ground clearance of any stock SUV, and approach and departure angles close to a Jeep. Read the Edmunds big-ute comparison test. It says it all.
Oh, and by the way, this isnt a "Boat" board. Try to stay on topic please.
vince, Hindesite, spoog: DECAF PLEASE!!! Vince: I owned a '71 Landcruiser in the mid '70's. It would almost climb walls. Axcel bigger than a Jeep. Mine had Warn hubs up front and selectable 4 wheel, a lever and pull button from under the dash, not a stick shifter. Just poor gas mileage (12-14 around town and offroad forget it), rough ride and too spartan in the interior. It was, at that time, an excellent offroad vehicle. Now like I said I did see a LC station wagon bogged sown in a marsh at 9-10,000 feet a few weeks ago.
Roses, chocolates and a nice dinner helped but she grabbed for my .40 cal S&W last weekend when I turned to the mountains (well ALMOST). Going now to get my pics from last weekend. Went off road and got to within 50 yds of a buck in velvet in a grassy field. Hope the pics are not too dark.
I like the new Range Rover stock. It is nuts. It's just a very stable vehicle.. cannot say anything for a landcruiser as I have not been in one, but for the new Jeeps, the Quadra Trac II is very impressive.
brianca, please read through all the posts again. Most people will not use the locker, or even know how/when to use a locker that buy the TRD package. Also, the supercharger and the light rearend just don't add up?? I'm am NOT trying to move you into a Ranger, you have obviously test driven both. What I am trying to do is save you some $$$$. If you decide to go Tacoma, take the extra cash and add a topper, spray in bedliner, or whatever you choose. Or maybe even a nice vacation??
Go back and grab the link I posted to the 4 wheel drive mag website for 98 pickup of the year. It gies a comprehensive hands on review of the Ranger nad Tacoma. Oh, and dont let Vince try and sway you from getting what you want. If you want the superior 4:10 gear ratio, locker, and supercharger, get it. Its ACTUALLY a deal compared to what it would cost to get a smilar setup after-market. Yeah the light rear and Supercharger make for some squirrly wet pavement driving, but thats what you would expect from a supercharger, isnt it?
So you think that 225lbs of torque is all that anyone will ever need? I was under the impressions that the supercharger would add more torque as well as HP. Not a bad deal as far as I can see. So long as I don't try to go 0-60 in 6 seconds in the rain, I don't think it'll cause me that much trouble to have the charger, and it might come in handy once or twice. You disagree?
Brianca- Get whatever amount of power that makes you happy. If you tests drive the 190 hp v6 and like it, get it. If you tests drive(hard to find) that 6 with the supercharger and are pleased, get it. Dont let Vince talk you down. At this very moment Vince is playing "catch-up" by ordering special air filters and computer chips, because he didnt or couldnt find a powerful enough engine to satisfy him that was stock. The supercharger has gotten me in trouble. In 7 years with a 22re toyota 4x4, I never got one speeding ticket. With my trd tacoma supercharger, I now have 3 in 1 and 1/2 years.
make sure you test drive either configuration. I have large tires on mine so it kind of helps balance the crazy power of the charger.
One of the neat things about the charger is how it sounds. It is really cool. When you start it up you can hear this little " whistling", and when you rev it in neutral, is sounds like one hell of a beast. Its great.
Are you running the tires that came with the TRD package, or have you upgraded? I've driven the V-6 TRD and I didn't think that more power would make the truck unmanagable.
Vince, I'm not too swayed by the $'s. I'm just looking for the best compact pickup on the market. I need a new vehicle, I want a truck, I'm not interested in full size. I do a lot of fishing and camping and I have friends who do a lot of four wheeling and I'd like to join in, so I'm going 4x4. I don't want to get robbed, but I'm not interested in less truck for less money. I ahve read the entire thread, and Spoog makes a good point about your K&N filter and Chip. If you don't think a truck should be charged, why add these things to yours?
OK, here goes. The Ranger has won 1999 4x4 of the year in the same mag spoog speaks of for 1998. The torque on the 4.0 V6 is 225ft/lbs vs 220 in the Toyota. There is a 30 hp advantage, but in a truck you are looking for torque right??? Also you have to reach 4800 rpms to get full advantage of the torque/hp of the Tacoma, its 3980 for the Ford Ranger. I use my Ranger also in the Cascades and deserts in Oregon. It has NEVER let me down, or have I gotten stuck. I camp/fish/hike, I use my 4x4 as a 4x4. I have taken some pretty challenging logging roads/forest roads/trails. I have a co-worker who thought his Tacoma would trounce my Ranger, I could go anywhere, pull anything, haul, climb anything he could! The Ranger is more equal to the Tacoma than some wish to believe or want to believe. Have you even test driven one?? My point is price. It is not a secret the Tacoma is more, option for option. The question is do you want to pay more for a perceived quality/reliability advantage or not. If you read back there are tons of sites both myself and other Ranger/Mazda fans have given to rebute any claim that the Ranger/Mazda are unreliable or unable to 4x4. As far as the supercharger/locker. I have talked to two avid offroaders, they can't understand why anyone would want a supercharger on a 4x4 pick-up truck. the weight is not balanced. The locker on the other hand is good, if you are an avid 4x4 off roader. An avid offroader is one who climbs rocks, extreme steep grades, buries his vehicle in water up to the doors, ect.. And one who doesn't give a damn if his rig gets dents, scratches or dings. Are you going to bring a new 23K+ rig into this kind of terrain? I paid 19.6K for an absolutley loaded Ranger 4x4 XLT kingcab 4.0 5spd. The Ranger is also available with a skidplate. I added a K&N air charger, nurfbars, spray in bedliner, rock guard, and some 31" tires. All for about 1K. So now my price is a total of about 20.6K. I also have the offroad package, tow package on my truck. I can out tow a Tacoma. I know there is no way you can get a Tacoma with all the same options I have for less than 23K. (This 23K price doesn't include my aftermarket add-ons.) The reason I know is I priced them at 3 different dealerships. I compared apples to apples. Why do I feel the need to add aftermarket parts? Why does spoog need a 2K supercharger? The torque/hp of the 4.0 are fine. I have the extra cash from not buying a Tacoma. These aftermarket parts are costing me under $600 total. I am still ahead of a comparable Tacoma. Spoog claims I am playing "catch up" or the Ranger/Mazda are "grocery getters". I still don't believe he owns this truck because his initial postings give it away. It sounds as though you are going to use your 4x4 for the same thing I use mine. Try a Ranger/Mazda. The Ranger has been the best selling compact pick-up for over 10 years!. If the Tacoma were so much "better" and "superior" why after even 4 years hasn't the sales figures shown this? I have never said the Tacoma is a bad truck, its a nice truck, Its a capable truck. But at a very stiff price. My only argument here at all is some in this room feel the Ranger/Mazda are so inferior. Also, if money is no option. Why spend 26K on a compact truck? For that kind of money you can get a very nice full size. See you in the hills.
Brianca, Whatever just get what you like and can afford. The advantage to the TRD is the locker. Only thing is that you can only use the locker in 4 low. If you are seriously going to go off roading then the locker is the better option over the limited slip. Some would disagree, but maybe you can ask your friends for their opinion. You could buy aftermarket lockers for the Ranger.
I don't have the supercharger then again I saw the no need for it. The 3.4 does fine and pulls in all the rev ranges where you need it.
I haven't had the chance to drive the Tacoma with a supercharger, but I know that my muscle cars the rear end is light. Anyway putting the power down is best with rear drive. I guess the Tacoma with the supercharger, may burn some rubber of the line, but by then the weight shifts to the rear. I just can't see it myself putting in a supercharger.
I have no probelm with Fords or Mazda's. I drive a 95 B2300 right now. That truck got me through college and my few years in the workforce so that I can now afford the truck I want. I love the mazda and would like to stay with them, but I don't think they have anything to offer against the TRD package with the charger. The mazda dealer I spoke to this week told me as much. With the charger I'll get ~270 lbs of torque that beats 225. I could add something on to the Mazda, but it wouldn't be under dealer warrenty, which I like a lot. I'd rather have the rear locker and never need it than the other way around and I don't want a full size truck. I want the best compact truck I can get, and even you seem to agree that it's the tacoma. You have said repeatedly in this forum that the ford is CLOSER to the toyota than most people want to admit. Not once have you said it's better, or even as good. You seem to be as avid a ford fan as I am likely to find, so that's quite an endorsement for the Tacoma in my eyes.
As for the charger, you said that you don't see why to put in on a 4X4, but you have also said that most people spend 99% of their time on the highway. this will be my dialy driver as well as my weekend play vehicle, I want the 60-75 acceleration on the highway just as badly as I want the off road capabilities.
I'd love to end up in another Mazda. I just need the ammo to convince me that it's the best truck. What is your current hp/torque with your aftermarket mods?
Consumer Reports selected Ranger a best buy most of the last 4-5 years. Dont quote me per se but you can go to the library and look it up. This selection came from the the unbiased input from users of the product. In the December 1998 issue of CR, head to head, Ranger was selected over Tacoma (not a TRD). In their summary recommendations the main comments were, and I quote (I have the article in my hand):
"The Toyota Tacom is a crude, unpleasant vehicle-surprising considering what we've to expect from this manufacturer. It provides the best acceleration and fuel economy overall, although the 4-wheel -drive version has been slightly worse. But it is hard to drive smoothly. The driving position is uncomfortable and there are no rear doors. The ride is appailingthe cabin is noisy and handling is no better than fair."
For the Ranger:
"The Ford is the best of the bunch (Ranger, S10, Tacoma) and the least expensive to boot outscoring Chevrolet in our tests. It is the easiest to drive smoothly and its handling thouhg hardly inspired, is the least trucklike. Its ride is stiff but improves with a full load. The 4 door cabin is a plus. Fuel economy is on par with the 4-wheel drive pickup."
CR also, if you look at their survey data for reliability, has the Tacoma and Ranger basically even for the last few years. This is available in the April 1999 issue.
What I like about mine is the handling. The Independent Front Suspension is, in my humble opinion, outstanding. It rides very well compared to a non TRD Tacoma. Now the TRD does provide bigger brakes and a very nice setup for 4 wheeling so maybe the handling and braking is improved. The locker is an advantage but not to be used unless you need to go basically in a straight line in a very difficult situation. I am considering a winch on my Ranger Vs any locker add on and am saving for the $800 cost. Getting 31X10.5 tires next week.
Just remember you drive the most on paved roads unless your job is a backwoods foreman or outfitter, etc. Make an informed choice. I have taken my stock, $17,000 or so Ranger everywhere I need to go for hunting, fishing trailheading in the Colorado Rockies in the San Isabel/Pike/Rio Grande National Forests that I need to go and it performed right up there with the Jeep Ranglers. I did spend $130 for skid plates and put them on myself (8 bolts/nuts, 1/2 hr). So here I am, $17,400 + 130(skids) + 350(spray bedliner) + 800 (winch) + 500(31X10.5 tires) for a total of $19,150 and I will be only 1 inch lower in clearance than a TRD and I can basically go where ever a TRD Tacoma can go.
$19,150 - Consumer Reports Rated "Recommended Best Buy" - Four Wheeler Magazine 1999 "Best Buy, Compact 4 wheel drive truck" - 4 wheel anti-lock brakes STANDARD - Anti-theft package STANDARD
But if you have an extra $5,000 and gotta have that locker,
In Petersen's 4 Wheel & Off-Road in the compact 4x4 pickup the Tacoma TRD won hands down over the competitors. Yes, the Ranger did come in second with 120 pts vs the Tacoma TRD with 148. Just be happy with whatever you buy. The Ranger is a very good truck and like the others have said if you want to save money then the Ranger/Mazda or the Nissan Frontier are good choices.
Just went to the Rocky Mtn. News and compared 94-95 Ranger Supercab and Toyota 4X4 prices for used vehicles.
Ranger averaged 11K to 13K resale value.
Toyota averaged 11K to 13K resale value.
So what happened to that extra money that was spent for the Toyota? Funny thing, at least in this issue of the paper it would appear that"
The Price Evened Out Between Ranger and Toyota.
Now that is not considering the Tacoma, I think.
Hindesite speaks the truth. Either one will get you there and I do not think I have ever questioned the ability of the Tacoma with the TRD setup. But I have been where I need to go 4 wheelin with my Ranger and it works quite well.
By the way, I will consider Rancho RS 9000 shocks over the Bilstine's that are on the Tacoma. Ranchos have 5 selectable levels and are not much more in price, 70 bucks. So if you add that to my 19,100 at lets say #360 installed, you get:
$19,760 an I feel I can go anywhere a TRD Tacoma can go.
Spoog: Man with 2 tickets whats your insurance like man?!? You gotta stop tryin to out race Rangers!
With the exception of the S10, and some people do like them (my sons friend has a real nice setup one, Bilstines, 31/10.5s, roll bar, 12 inches clearance HMMMM, sounds like the TRD stats) and he paid 15K for a used 97. He loves it but I just think their reliabilty is poor.
I don't know where the $5000 number is comming from. I cna get the Tacoma I want without the charger for around 21k. You payed 19.5. That's $1500. I don't know what options you have added, but this is with power package, CD player, bucket seats, etc, etc. I don't think I'd need any more. Again, I'd like to not focus on money. If I wanted the best buy, I'd keep my b2300. I've had the best buy, now I want the best truck. I'm looking at a TRD tacoma, so comparisons against a non-trd do me little or no good. What do I need to do aftermarket to the ford/mazda to make it a supercharged TRD? The locker is basically positraction, correct? That would be handy with the superchager as well as off road.
I'm curious why you would buy the ford when, from what I understand, the mazda is more or less the same truck for more or less the same price with a better warranty? If I do go that direction, what's the difference in the two?
Take a look at the 98 4wheeler pickup of the year award. I posted the URL many posts back. It shows picures and stats on the competing trucks. Man, you really need to take a look at the pics of the suspension, brake, and diff components. Superb engineering. Also, Vince and Cspousner seem to think that the only diff between a 19,500 raanger and a 21,500 tacoma is a the locking Diff. Well, you also get alot of things the ranger doesnt offer, such as heavy duty fuel tank cover, standard skid plates, higher minimum gournd clearance, 30 more horsepower, a clutch start cancels switch, higher ingine intake placement for water crossings, and a much more sporty steering setup. Ive EXHAUSTED myself point ing this out to vince, but he doesnt get it. If he added these things to his 19500 ranger, it would be MORE than the 21500 for the Tacoma. Plus, in my opinion, the Tacoma just LOOKS alot sportier and more rugged than the Ranger and Mazda. The Tacoma has STYLE. I see mostly middle aged folks in the Rangers as I blow by them.
Cspousner:
No way in hell are 70 dollar shocks going to make your Ranger as offroad worthy as the Tacoma TRD. Neither is getting bigger tires or some addon skid plates. You need to look at the big picture here. THE TACOMA IS DESIGNED FOR OFF ROAD USE. It was engineered for that premise. If you think your little po-dink Ranger with 31's , no locker, no bilstiens, no larger brakes, no sports tuned supspension, no clutch start cancel, no fuel tank cover,and 100 less horsepower can compete with my Tacoma offroad, you are insane. When did you get the wicnc? I didnt see it in the pix. Sure, your range can do fine on the roads, but just like 4wheeler mag said, the TOYTA tacoma EATS UP THE washboards, unlike the bucking and bouncing Ranger. They even said the Ranger had trouble "keeping up".
Take this as a lesson Brianca. Do you see all these people trying to play catchup? They tell you to save money, to buy the best deal, yet they are spending extra money AND time to try and catch up to the better truck. Is almost funny. getting it all in one STOCK package is oh-so-nice. no wasting time, playing "catch-up". these folks are walking contradictions. Learn from their mistakes.
spoog: Would agree with you if you add the acronym TRD to Tacoma, to a point.
I HAVE a fuel tank skid plate, cost 103 bucks.
My clearance, if I believe the tire data, will go up right at 2 inches to 10.5 at the differential, 12 inches at the front crossbar, 10 inches at the contol arms. I measured a Tacoma 4X4 accross the street at 10.5 at the differential.
As for the shocks, I was just stating that when I do get them (shocks do wear out and I wont go for stock on a replacement) and put them on they adjust from 1, for paved road to 5 for heavy 4X driving. I have read that they, Rancho RS9000's are much better than the Bilstines. Would like to hear from anyone that has had both.
You are correct that the TRD was designed for off road. Hence Toyota Racing Department/Designers/Devision (what ever it is) And I have told you that it is an impressive vehicle.
brianca: The 5K was compared to the TRD w/supercharger.
If you can get a TRD Tacoma for 21K that is a good price but I think your talkin a Tacoma non-TRD.
A locker, as I understand it, locks the rear axcel. When you lock it, you basically go straight. If you lock it on a paved road, I think you rather quickly flip the truck as wheels have to turn differently while going around curves. A posi is another name for a limited slip which transfers power to the slipping wheel via mostly clutches.
Let me relate a brief story about my sons friends 88 Ranger XLT longbed. He has the 2.9 V6 145K miles and a 3.73 limited slip and very bald tires. He is getting my Wilderness ATs when I go to the BF Goodrich's.
A 70s Bronco tried to go up a 40-50 deg ATV trail and stopped, a bad move in soft dirt and gravel. He slid off and could not get out. The first camp had a Tacoma SR5 but they refused to go help. Dennis got in his Ranger, drove up the other part of the horseshoe ATV trail, turned around, tied a rope to the Bronco and gave it enough pull from the top to dislodge the Bronco. So they will work very well in 4 wheel conditions.
Why not the Mazda? I dont know just personal choice. My ford financing was 2.9% which MAzda did not have, saved me around a grand in financing.
If money is not the object and you are really into agressive 4 wheelin than the TRD should be for you. But I dont think you will get a 99 or 00 TRD for 21K. That is what the loaded Tacoma non TRDs go for here.
I am talking about the TRD package for ~21.5k. I've driven them all and I certainly didn't see any major differences in the ride. The TRD was smooth on the highway and the cabin noise was nonexistant. It did lean out of the turns quite a bit, but it handled well. I'm sure the lean was just a product of the height, and the mazda probably would have done it as well if the salesman had let me drive it as hard. So now the question is b4000 at ~19k or a TRD at ~21.5k? I'll deal with the supercharge as the aftermarket add-on that it is.
hey C, what is the sterring setup on the Ranger. I know the tacoma has a rack and pinion.
As for the regular sr5 4wd tacoma(non-trd) it still has a higher ground clearance, still comes with standard engine, diff, and fuel tank skid plates, a clutch start cancel switch , higher engine placement, the superior 4:10 gears, an optional locker, 6 bolts on the wheels, larger brakes, rack and pinion steering, 30 more horsepower. All that can be had WIHTOUT the TRD package. The Tacoma sr5 in non TRD form is still a superior offroad machine to the Ranger. You could fairly easily get a non-trd tacoma for 20,000, with the options I mentioned.
You made an error earlier too. The TACOMA IS designed for offroad use, not just the TRD. The TRD is the icing on the cake. The toyota pickups have always been excellent stock offroaders, as well as the rest of the Toyota trucks.
Rack and pinion on the Ranger and it out turns the Tacoma by 2 feet, 38 to 40 in a circle.
Hmmm I guess my error. I was under the impression the TRD was the one truly designed for off road.
You may have misunderstood what I said before so I will simplify.
Add Rancho 9000 shocks for about 400 and they are great for off road and superior by all data I have seen to the Bilstines. Add the 31X10.5 Goodrich tires for 500 and by their stats the increase from a 235R7515 is about 2 inches in diamater which I believe will give me 2 inches more clearance. That puts me at 12 inches dead center front/the transfer case and fuel tank, 10.5 inches on the lowest point front suspension and differential (my differential you will recall is 8.8 inches not 7.5 like the Tacoma). That places me 1.5 inches off the Tacoma. Add a winch for security rather than buy the locker rear and yes spoog I feel I can go anywhere basically the Tacoma can go.
My Rangers torque curve is better because I get max torque at 2750 rpm much lower than the Tacoma.
Also, just for grins go measure your frame and compare to the Ranger. The Tacoma frame is much less massive than the Rangers, hence the lighter weight of the vehicle.
In regard to 4 wheeler 1998 Truck of the Year? Remember, that magazine ONLY takes the new design trucks for that year, NOT all trucks to determine their choice. And they ran a Tacoma TRD extracab vs a Ranger short bed.
Consumer Reports, for overall vehicle satisfaction and their input comes from Ranger owners and Tacoma owners rates them basically even with Tacoma getting the only black circle rating in the area of "integrity" which indicated that there is a much higher reporting of problems with seals, weather stripping, air and water leaks, wind noise, rattles and shakes on the Tacoma.
Remember Tacoma OWNERS reported these problems to Consumer Reports. And their testers perfered the ride of the Ranger over Tacoma.
They also said the vehicle was "crude" compared to what they expected from Toyota.
Brian, could not touch a TRD for that price in Denver.
Also remember, that extra you pay may not come back in vehicle value in 5-10 years. Read a previous post of mine for that.
Now spoog I posted my pictures of my Ranger at 10,000 feet altitude, on a 4X road, have been over 10,700 foot Haden Pass both rated as "difficult" in a 4 wheeler mag, been to 9000 feet in the Pike Nat Forest on ATV trails and most importaintly
I HAVE YET TO SEE YOU PUBLISH ANY PICTURES OF YOUR TACOMA DOING ANYTHING.
But yet you dis me up one side and down the other about your truck being so superior.
Limited slip differentials (LS) and "lockers" (locking differentials) are two different things.The LS is a (usually) clutch device that essentially doesn't completely release the high traction side. However, the high traction side does slip, to a degree determined by the traction of the clutches. A locker positively locks the two sides together, so that neither side ever turns slower than the ring gear. It allows constant traction in both wheels to be applied regardless of slippage.
Comments
http://members.aol.com/cpousnr/index1.html
Starts on the east side sign, on top @10,000 next to the summit sign, the valley leading to the west, at the Sand Dunes on west side, looking back to the cut I came down and on my property working.
It takes a coulpe of min. to load. On the bottom is a 400K file of the launch of the Cassini spacecraft to Saturn, highly detailed.
Just thought I would share
I was at the Stevenson dealership in Denver this afternoon to check that price. Of course, it was without the TRD option.
Well going to play with my strumstick(string instrument). Anyone have any preference on part time 4 wheel drive vs all wheel drive?
In the NW, there are also a lot of Rangers and Toyotas. Actually, these two pretty much dominate! I just don't see very many Frontiers or S-10's here.
Hind, you sure do have a heat wave going on out there. Hear a lot of people are having a hard time, especially the elderly. They are saying the West is next. Keep cool.
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Garage/8782/http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Garage/8782/
rustyle1:
So we are still in the neighborhood of $20,000+ for a TRD equipped Tacoma?
hindsite:
My driveway is at about 5,700'. . .
(just gotta rib a bit. . .
Thanks, I do need to travel with someone to have them get some pics with me driving. On the next to last picture you see the cut in the middle to the south side of the large mountain (around 12,600' I think. That is where I came and it is about 12 miles from the top down to where I took the pic. The creek runs down that cut and you cross it about 10 times, 3 bumper deep.
You cannot see her too well but I had a real pissed off wife sitting in the cab!
Final picture on the property shows 4 14,000'peaks and the land is at about 8,200'.
Well hope it will not be as hot in the West as it was over here. Yeah, I was surveying the subway tunnels in NYC Tuesday and it must have been like 125 degrees in the tunnels. Hope to finish this job soon and head back to home to New Hampshire to relax. Actually the Toyotas that I saw were mostly pre-Tacomas and the Rangers were from 1994 to the present. Did see at least 3 Frontiers, but they seem like a rarity here in the East coast. Ditto for NH also.
I wonder if those AWD suv's are really that good off roading. I guess those that have AWD that don't have the center lock must have a difficult time off roading. Ford has been heading that direction with AWD and wonder if they plan to take it to the truck line. Okay one more question did Mazda have any input in the Ranger design?
Your web site does not exist anymore concerning the Ranger. Well, unfortunately I didn't drive up a driveway
Spoog why don't you zip it for a while.
full time 4 wheel drive. So does the higher
end Jeep GrandCherokee and the 4runner limited.
Hey Hindsite, why don't you "zip" it?
I never said I hated Toyota's spoog. I never even said the Tacoma was a terrible truck either.
I just rebuted you claims that all Rangers/Mazda's are "grocery getters" will fall apart, are terrible trucks, cheap, ect...
I really doubt that the Land Cruiser is one of the best stock off road vehicles ever made. Do you think I am going to listen to a fledgling that harangues when confronted with a view dissimilar to his.
bad...
tell you the Landcruiser, Jeep, and Range Rover
are the best stock offroad vehicles. I believe the Landcruiser comes with a front, center, and rear locking differential(3), automatic interior
tire deflation with the push of a button in the cockpit, the highest ground clearance of any stock SUV, and approach and departure angles close to a Jeep. Read the Edmunds big-ute comparison test. It says it all.
Oh, and by the way, this isnt a "Boat" board.
Try to stay on topic please.
They offer the locker without the TRD package for the Tacoma.
Spoog
you can take the Land Cruiser and I will take the Grand Cherokee. Someone asked about the boat, but I will gladly limit your knowledge base.
Just for the sake of disagreement?
not thier SUV's.
DECAF PLEASE!!!
Vince:
I owned a '71 Landcruiser in the mid '70's. It would almost climb walls. Axcel bigger than a Jeep. Mine had Warn hubs up front and selectable 4 wheel, a lever and pull button from under the dash, not a stick shifter. Just poor gas mileage (12-14 around town and offroad forget it), rough ride and too spartan in the interior. It was, at that time, an excellent offroad vehicle. Now like I said I did see a LC station wagon bogged sown in a marsh at 9-10,000 feet a few weeks ago.
hindesite:
Check it again. Just went there:
http://members.aol.com/cpousnr/index1.html
OK dave40, I will put them over there!
Welcome to AOL quality!
Roses, chocolates and a nice dinner helped but she grabbed for my .40 cal S&W last weekend when I turned to the mountains (well ALMOST). Going now to get my pics from last weekend. Went off road and got to within 50 yds of a buck in velvet in a grassy field. Hope the pics are not too dark.
Since the Land Cruiser is an SUV then why would I not take the Grand Cherokee? I can't see calling a Wrangler or whatever a SUV.
I meant to say that the site you had for the Ranger in Motor Trend did not exist anymore.
I was wondering where do you get 85 octane gas from? I never seen 85 and the lowest I have seen is 87 octane.
Well get your wife a Glock 17. Nice firearm to have around.
Maybe the LC forgot to engage the locker. I did that once, but had enough momentum to carry me through.
4 wheel drive mag website for 98 pickup
of the year. It gies a comprehensive hands on review of the Ranger nad Tacoma. Oh, and dont let Vince try and sway you from getting what you want. If you want the superior 4:10 gear ratio, locker, and supercharger, get it. Its ACTUALLY
a deal compared to what it would cost to get a smilar setup after-market. Yeah the light rear and Supercharger make for some squirrly wet pavement driving, but thats what you would expect from a supercharger, isnt it?
Topic #775 TRUCK PICTURES
brianca..
you happy. If you tests drive the 190 hp v6 and like it, get it. If you tests drive(hard to find) that 6 with the supercharger and are pleased, get it. Dont let Vince talk you down. At this very moment Vince is playing "catch-up"
by ordering special air filters and computer chips, because he didnt or couldnt find a powerful enough engine to satisfy him that was stock. The supercharger has gotten me in trouble. In 7 years with a 22re toyota 4x4, I never got one speeding ticket. With my trd tacoma
supercharger, I now have 3 in 1 and 1/2 years.
make sure you test drive either configuration.
I have large tires on mine so it kind of helps balance the crazy power of the charger.
One of the neat things about the charger is how it sounds. It is really cool. When you start it up you can hear this little " whistling", and when you rev it in neutral, is sounds like one hell of a beast. Its great.
Vince,
I'm not too swayed by the $'s. I'm just looking for the best compact pickup on the market. I need a new vehicle, I want a truck, I'm not interested in full size. I do a lot of fishing and camping and I have friends who do a lot of four wheeling and I'd like to join in, so I'm going 4x4. I don't want to get robbed, but I'm not interested in less truck for less money. I ahve read the entire thread, and Spoog makes a good point about your K&N filter and Chip. If you don't think a truck should be charged, why add these things to yours?
brianca...
The torque on the 4.0 V6 is 225ft/lbs vs 220 in the Toyota. There is a 30 hp advantage, but in a truck you are looking for torque right??? Also you have to reach 4800 rpms to get full advantage of the torque/hp of the Tacoma, its 3980 for the Ford Ranger.
I use my Ranger also in the Cascades and deserts in Oregon. It has NEVER let me down, or have I gotten stuck. I camp/fish/hike, I use my 4x4 as a 4x4. I have taken some pretty challenging logging roads/forest roads/trails. I have a co-worker who thought his Tacoma would trounce my Ranger, I could go anywhere, pull anything, haul, climb anything he could! The Ranger is more equal to the Tacoma than some wish to believe or want to believe. Have you even test driven one??
My point is price. It is not a secret the Tacoma is more, option for option. The question is do you want to pay more for a perceived quality/reliability advantage or not. If you read back there are tons of sites both myself and other Ranger/Mazda fans have given to rebute any claim that the Ranger/Mazda are unreliable or unable to 4x4.
As far as the supercharger/locker. I have talked to two avid offroaders, they can't understand why anyone would want a supercharger on a 4x4 pick-up truck. the weight is not balanced.
The locker on the other hand is good, if you are an avid 4x4 off roader. An avid offroader is one who climbs rocks, extreme steep grades, buries his vehicle in water up to the doors, ect.. And one who doesn't give a damn if his rig gets dents, scratches or dings. Are you going to bring a new 23K+ rig into this kind of terrain?
I paid 19.6K for an absolutley loaded Ranger 4x4 XLT kingcab 4.0 5spd. The Ranger is also available with a skidplate. I added a K&N air charger, nurfbars, spray in bedliner, rock guard, and some 31" tires. All for about 1K. So now my price is a total of about 20.6K. I also have the offroad package, tow package on my truck. I can out tow a Tacoma. I know there is no way you can get a Tacoma with all the same options I have for less than 23K. (This 23K price doesn't include my aftermarket add-ons.) The reason I know is I priced them at 3 different dealerships. I compared apples to apples.
Why do I feel the need to add aftermarket parts? Why does spoog need a 2K supercharger? The torque/hp of the 4.0 are fine. I have the extra cash from not buying a Tacoma. These aftermarket parts are costing me under $600 total. I am still ahead of a comparable Tacoma. Spoog claims I am playing "catch up" or the Ranger/Mazda are "grocery getters". I still don't believe he owns this truck because his initial postings give it away.
It sounds as though you are going to use your 4x4 for the same thing I use mine. Try a Ranger/Mazda. The Ranger has been the best selling compact pick-up for over 10 years!. If the Tacoma were so much "better" and "superior" why after even 4 years hasn't the sales figures shown this?
I have never said the Tacoma is a bad truck, its a nice truck, Its a capable truck. But at a very stiff price. My only argument here at all is some in this room feel the Ranger/Mazda are so inferior.
Also, if money is no option. Why spend 26K on a compact truck? For that kind of money you can get a very nice full size.
See you in the hills.
Whatever just get what you like and can afford. The advantage to the TRD is the locker. Only thing is that you can only use the locker in 4 low. If you are seriously going to go off roading then the locker is the better option over the limited slip. Some would disagree, but maybe you can ask your friends for their opinion. You could buy aftermarket lockers for the Ranger.
I don't have the supercharger then again I saw the no need for it. The 3.4 does fine and pulls in all the rev ranges where you need it.
With the charger I'll get ~270 lbs of torque that beats 225. I could add something on to the Mazda, but it wouldn't be under dealer warrenty, which I like a lot. I'd rather have the rear locker and never need it than the other way around and I don't want a full size truck.
I want the best compact truck I can get, and even you seem to agree that it's the tacoma. You have said repeatedly in this forum that the ford is CLOSER to the toyota than most people want to admit. Not once have you said it's better, or even as good. You seem to be as avid a ford fan as I am likely to find, so that's quite an endorsement for the Tacoma in my eyes.
As for the charger, you said that you don't see why to put in on a 4X4, but you have also said that most people spend 99% of their time on the highway. this will be my dialy driver as well as my weekend play vehicle, I want the 60-75 acceleration on the highway just as badly as I want the off road capabilities.
I'd love to end up in another Mazda. I just need the ammo to convince me that it's the best truck. What is your current hp/torque with your aftermarket mods?
brianca
"The Toyota Tacom is a crude, unpleasant vehicle-surprising considering what we've to expect from this manufacturer. It provides the best acceleration and fuel economy overall, although the 4-wheel -drive version has been slightly worse. But it is hard to drive smoothly. The driving position is uncomfortable and there are no rear doors. The ride is appailingthe cabin is noisy and handling is no better than fair."
For the Ranger:
"The Ford is the best of the bunch (Ranger, S10, Tacoma) and the least expensive to boot outscoring Chevrolet in our tests. It is the easiest to drive smoothly and its handling thouhg hardly inspired, is the least trucklike. Its ride is stiff but improves with a full load. The 4 door cabin is a plus. Fuel economy is on par with the 4-wheel drive pickup."
CR also, if you look at their survey data for reliability, has the Tacoma and Ranger basically even for the last few years. This is available in the April 1999 issue.
What I like about mine is the handling. The Independent Front Suspension is, in my humble opinion, outstanding. It rides very well compared to a non TRD Tacoma. Now the TRD does provide bigger brakes and a very nice setup for 4 wheeling so maybe the handling and braking is improved. The locker is an advantage but not to be used unless you need to go basically in a straight line in a very difficult situation. I am considering a winch on my Ranger Vs any locker add on and am saving for the $800 cost. Getting 31X10.5 tires next week.
Just remember you drive the most on paved roads unless your job is a backwoods foreman or outfitter, etc. Make an informed choice. I have taken my stock, $17,000 or so Ranger everywhere I need to go for hunting, fishing trailheading in the Colorado Rockies in the San Isabel/Pike/Rio Grande National Forests that I need to go and it performed right up there with the Jeep Ranglers. I did spend $130 for skid plates and put them on myself (8 bolts/nuts, 1/2 hr). So here I am, $17,400 + 130(skids) + 350(spray bedliner) + 800 (winch) + 500(31X10.5 tires) for a total of $19,150 and I will be only 1 inch lower in clearance than a TRD and I can basically go where ever a TRD Tacoma can go.
$19,150
- Consumer Reports Rated "Recommended Best Buy"
- Four Wheeler Magazine 1999 "Best Buy, Compact 4 wheel drive truck"
- 4 wheel anti-lock brakes STANDARD
- Anti-theft package STANDARD
But if you have an extra $5,000 and gotta have that locker,
Buy the Tayota TRD.
Ranger averaged 11K to 13K resale value.
Toyota averaged 11K to 13K resale value.
So what happened to that extra money that was spent for the Toyota? Funny thing, at least in this issue of the paper it would appear that"
The Price Evened Out Between Ranger and Toyota.
Now that is not considering the Tacoma, I think.
Hindesite speaks the truth. Either one will get you there and I do not think I have ever questioned the ability of the Tacoma with the TRD setup. But I have been where I need to go 4 wheelin with my Ranger and it works quite well.
By the way, I will consider Rancho RS 9000 shocks over the Bilstine's that are on the Tacoma. Ranchos have 5 selectable levels and are not much more in price, 70 bucks. So if you add that to my 19,100 at lets say #360 installed, you get:
$19,760 an I feel I can go anywhere a TRD Tacoma can go.
Spoog:
Man with 2 tickets whats your insurance like man?!? You gotta stop tryin to out race Rangers!
With the exception of the S10, and some people do like them (my sons friend has a real nice setup one, Bilstines, 31/10.5s, roll bar, 12 inches clearance HMMMM, sounds like the TRD stats) and he paid 15K for a used 97. He loves it but I just think their reliabilty is poor.
Again, I'd like to not focus on money. If I wanted the best buy, I'd keep my b2300. I've had the best buy, now I want the best truck. I'm looking at a TRD tacoma, so comparisons against a non-trd do me little or no good. What do I need to do aftermarket to the ford/mazda to make it a supercharged TRD?
The locker is basically positraction, correct? That would be handy with the superchager as well as off road.
brian
brian.
It shows picures and stats on the competing trucks. Man, you really need to take a look at
the pics of the suspension, brake, and diff components. Superb engineering. Also,
Vince and Cspousner seem to think that the only diff between a 19,500 raanger and a 21,500 tacoma
is a the locking Diff. Well, you also get alot of things the ranger doesnt offer, such as heavy duty fuel tank cover, standard skid plates, higher minimum gournd clearance, 30 more horsepower, a clutch start cancels switch, higher ingine intake placement for water crossings, and
a much more sporty steering setup. Ive EXHAUSTED myself point ing this out to vince, but he doesnt get it. If he added these things to his 19500 ranger, it would be MORE than the 21500
for the Tacoma. Plus, in my opinion, the Tacoma just LOOKS alot sportier and more rugged than the Ranger and Mazda. The Tacoma has STYLE. I see mostly middle aged folks in the Rangers as I blow by them.
Cspousner:
No way in hell are 70 dollar shocks going to make your Ranger as offroad worthy as the Tacoma TRD.
Neither is getting bigger tires or some addon skid plates. You need to look at the big picture here. THE TACOMA IS DESIGNED FOR OFF ROAD USE.
It was engineered for that premise.
If you think your little po-dink Ranger with 31's , no locker, no bilstiens, no larger brakes, no sports tuned supspension, no clutch start cancel, no fuel tank cover,and 100 less horsepower can compete with my Tacoma offroad, you are insane.
When did you get the wicnc? I didnt see it in the pix. Sure, your range can do fine on the roads, but just like 4wheeler mag said, the TOYTA tacoma EATS UP THE washboards, unlike the bucking and bouncing Ranger. They even said the Ranger had trouble "keeping up".
Take this as a lesson Brianca. Do you see all these people trying to play catchup? They tell you to save money, to buy the best deal, yet they are spending extra money AND time to try and catch up to the better truck. Is almost funny.
getting it all in one STOCK package is oh-so-nice.
no wasting time, playing "catch-up". these folks are walking contradictions. Learn from their mistakes.
If so, which month?
Would agree with you if you add the acronym TRD to Tacoma, to a point.
I HAVE a fuel tank skid plate, cost 103 bucks.
My clearance, if I believe the tire data, will go up right at 2 inches to 10.5 at the differential, 12 inches at the front crossbar, 10 inches at the contol arms. I measured a Tacoma 4X4 accross the street at 10.5 at the differential.
As for the shocks, I was just stating that when I do get them (shocks do wear out and I wont go for stock on a replacement) and put them on they adjust from 1, for paved road to 5 for heavy 4X driving. I have read that they, Rancho RS9000's are much better than the Bilstines. Would like to hear from anyone that has had both.
You are correct that the TRD was designed for off road. Hence Toyota Racing Department/Designers/Devision (what ever it is) And I have told you that it is an impressive vehicle.
brianca:
The 5K was compared to the TRD w/supercharger.
If you can get a TRD Tacoma for 21K that is a good price but I think your talkin a Tacoma non-TRD.
A locker, as I understand it, locks the rear axcel. When you lock it, you basically go straight. If you lock it on a paved road, I think you rather quickly flip the truck as wheels have to turn differently while going around curves. A posi is another name for a limited slip which transfers power to the slipping wheel via mostly clutches.
Let me relate a brief story about my sons friends 88 Ranger XLT longbed. He has the 2.9 V6 145K miles and a 3.73 limited slip and very bald tires. He is getting my Wilderness ATs when I go to the BF Goodrich's.
A 70s Bronco tried to go up a 40-50 deg ATV trail and stopped, a bad move in soft dirt and gravel. He slid off and could not get out. The first camp had a Tacoma SR5 but they refused to go help. Dennis got in his Ranger, drove up the other part of the horseshoe ATV trail, turned around, tied a rope to the Bronco and gave it enough pull from the top to dislodge the Bronco. So they will work very well in 4 wheel conditions.
Why not the Mazda? I dont know just personal choice. My ford financing was 2.9% which MAzda did not have, saved me around a grand in financing.
If money is not the object and you are really into agressive 4 wheelin than the TRD should be for you. But I dont think you will get a 99 or 00 TRD for 21K. That is what the loaded Tacoma non TRDs go for here.
Someone posted a while back that a lot of women are buying Rangers.
spoog:
I would agree with most you said about Tacoma if you add TRD.
I dont think the Tacoma basic 4X was engineered for off-road like the TRD.
And brian, the main complaint of Consumer Reports on Tacoma was the ride and handling, not its 4x abilities.
brianca
I know the tacoma has a rack and pinion.
As for the regular sr5 4wd tacoma(non-trd)
it still has a higher ground clearance, still comes with standard engine, diff, and fuel tank skid plates, a clutch start cancel switch , higher engine placement, the superior 4:10 gears,
an optional locker, 6 bolts on the wheels, larger brakes, rack and pinion steering, 30 more horsepower. All that can be had WIHTOUT the TRD package. The Tacoma sr5 in non TRD form is still a superior offroad machine to the Ranger.
You could fairly easily get a non-trd tacoma for 20,000, with the options I mentioned.
You made an error earlier too. The TACOMA IS
designed for offroad use, not just the TRD.
The TRD is the icing on the cake. The toyota pickups have always been excellent stock offroaders, as well as the rest of the Toyota trucks.
Hmmm I guess my error. I was under the impression the TRD was the one truly designed for off road.
You may have misunderstood what I said before so I will simplify.
Add Rancho 9000 shocks for about 400 and they are great for off road and superior by all data I have seen to the Bilstines.
Add the 31X10.5 Goodrich tires for 500 and by their stats the increase from a 235R7515 is about 2 inches in diamater which I believe will give me 2 inches more clearance. That puts me at 12 inches dead center front/the transfer case and fuel tank, 10.5 inches on the lowest point front suspension and differential (my differential you will recall is 8.8 inches not 7.5 like the Tacoma). That places me 1.5 inches off the Tacoma. Add a winch for security rather than buy the locker rear and yes spoog I feel I can go anywhere basically the Tacoma can go.
My Rangers torque curve is better because I get max torque at 2750 rpm much lower than the Tacoma.
Also, just for grins go measure your frame and compare to the Ranger. The Tacoma frame is much less massive than the Rangers, hence the lighter weight of the vehicle.
In regard to 4 wheeler 1998 Truck of the Year? Remember, that magazine ONLY takes the new design trucks for that year, NOT all trucks to determine their choice. And they ran a Tacoma TRD extracab vs a Ranger short bed.
Consumer Reports, for overall vehicle satisfaction and their input comes from Ranger owners and Tacoma owners rates them basically even with Tacoma getting the only black circle rating in the area of "integrity" which indicated that there is a much higher reporting of problems with seals, weather stripping, air and water leaks, wind noise, rattles and shakes on the Tacoma.
Remember Tacoma OWNERS reported these problems to Consumer Reports. And their testers perfered the ride of the Ranger over Tacoma.
They also said the vehicle was "crude" compared to what they expected from Toyota.
Brian, could not touch a TRD for that price in Denver.
Also remember, that extra you pay may not come back in vehicle value in 5-10 years. Read a previous post of mine for that.
Now spoog I posted my pictures of my Ranger at 10,000 feet altitude, on a 4X road, have been over 10,700 foot Haden Pass both rated as "difficult" in a 4 wheeler mag, been to 9000 feet in the Pike Nat Forest on ATV trails and most importaintly
I HAVE YET TO SEE YOU PUBLISH ANY PICTURES OF YOUR TACOMA DOING ANYTHING.
But yet you dis me up one side and down the other about your truck being so superior.
PUT UP OR SHUT UP
There is a Tundra but no Tacoma.
You can digitize them ro 5 bucks with Kodak processing, you get a disk with the jpgs on it.
So how much is your insurance with 3 speeding tickets spoog? I would loose my insurance with that many.
Maybe vince is right and you dont own a Tacoma.
Put up or shut up buddy I am done with you.
Post your TACOMA Pictures
Topic #775 TRUCK PICTURES
(locking differentials) are two different things.The LS is a (usually) clutch device that essentially doesn't completely release the high traction side. However, the high traction side does slip, to a degree determined by the traction of the clutches. A locker positively locks the two sides together, so that neither side ever turns slower than the ring gear. It allows constant traction in both wheels to be applied regardless of slippage.