By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
-wsn
banner.
63 technical service buulettins for the 98-99
Ranger, and 7 for the 98-99 Tacoma. Thats not a small difference there Cspousner, thats a HUGE difference. Quality is not just engine problems,
its the complete vehicle package.
As for the clutch start cancel switch, it is for manual transmissions. Its purpose is this:
when stuck on a steep hill or in mud, and the driver screws up and stalls the truck, pressing the clutch/start cancel switch will allow you to start your truck WITHOUT pressing down the clutch.
On a hill or mud, pressing down the clutch to start may cause your tires to lose their grip and roll, or for the truck to lose its good position.
It allows you to keep your foot on the brake only when you start your manual trans truck.
Its especially helpful when cruising up a steep
muddy hill. Ive stalled my taco a few times when doing this(driver error), and the switch helped me STAY right in the exact place when I restarted the truck. Had I not had the switch, I probably would have rolled back down the muddy hill backwards.
The pollution control problem with the Toyota there is no specific make. As for the Tacomas rolling over there is no proof. Proof is that the Ranger has a tendency to rollover published by the NTSHA
Spoog,
Does the manual have the ECT or is it only in the automatic
Hvynguven
Congrats on your truck
Try this site
http://www.4x44u.com/pub/k2/am4x44u/trails
I know you measured your tires, differential etc.. but measurements like that can vary, especially due to air pressure in the tires, and the difficulty of accurately measuring the height of oval shaped objects like tires.. you said "You see, your limited by the radius of the wheel
which on a 15 inch wheel is 7.5 inches. Then the
distance of the tire rubber from ground to rim on
my BF Goodrich tires is 6.5 inches. So that equals 14 inches"
....If this is accurate you are telling me your brand new 31" x 10.5" BFG's are really, by your own calculations....2*14(measured radius)=.....28" x 10.5" BFG's......If that is the case i would ask for some money back, or another set of tires that are at least in the ball park of the size of the tire your paying for.
....And don't take this the wrong way but I seen this about ten times now...it's an axle...not an axcel.
Like I said, I haven't checked into this for either rangers or taco's, but if I were to get bigger tires I would definitely check with my dealer or Manufacturer first......just something to think about.
New Tire diameter(inches)/old tire diameter (inches) x indicated mph
Hvnguyen,
Actually tires do make a difference, but at some point you would need to additional lift. They have kits for lifting the truck that you can find in 4x4 magazine advertisment. I guess the typical is about 3" lift. Or you could go to a 4x4 shop that specializes in modifications. Really I would find out exactly what kind of off-roading you will be doing, before you consider the above.
Try these sites for specific information regarding your Taco.
http://www.off-road.com/4x4web/toyota/toyota.html
On the second site there is a popup screen so you can close it when it opens
http://www.ttora-ne.mainpage.net
Well in a word they are GREAT. Went back up Music Pass in the Sangre's and the tires, due to size and grip, never appeard to break loose. Luggs a bit more as they have effected the final drive ratio so have to use 4 wheel low more than before. Also, around town, use 5th gear less.
I do not know much about the Goodyear Wranglers on the Tacomas but would recommend considering the BFG's due to the way they preform. They do get more road hum, sing abit at 65-75 mph.
ONLY issue is deciding what air to run. On the Ranger Tech board some say run less air (30 lb.) some say reun more air (40-44 lb.).
Any suggestions from the Tacoma crew running the 31x10.5x15 Goodyears?
Thanks for the input. I unhooked the battery to reset the computer after getting the tires installed, just in case.
I wish i had the goodyears. Seems like every manufaturer, Toyota doesn't always use the same tires on every model. My 98 and my buddies 99 came with Firestone Wilderness AT's. There not bad tires there just not goodyears or BFG's
Cpousnr
Let me know what they do in snow when the time comes. I read a review on them and they were rated very good in snow.
-wsn
Basically yes the tires make the difference in hight. Rim size too but you get into clearance issues if you go above 31X10.5X15s or 265X75X16s and then you need a body lift. On the Tacoma the differential is much more streamlined and an 8 inch vs 8.8 on the Ranger.
matty:
Well the stated size of the BFG 31s is 30.7 inches but as was stated earlier, they do squish down. Dont get me wrong, I was just throwing out some estimated figures when talking on measuring from the ground to the middle of the hub air pressure etc does effect the distance. It was a rough calculation to support the measurement of 10 inches to the Ranger differential and a bit more to the AXLE (never said I could spell!).
Clearance on the Ranger is quite sufficient to go over anything in my way, so far and most anything in any other place. If there is a 11.5 inch high rock in the way, I will go around or back down. But if a Tacoma continues, it WILL hit that rock right on that pretty differential.
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/problems/recalls/recmmy1.cfm
In 96 there was a Ranger recall for incorrect tire pressure listed, not a safety issue and for Tacoma Independent Front Suspension support cracks and speed control does not set right speed, both listed as safety issues.
In 98/99 there were 10 Ranger listings, many DUPLICATE for a total of 4 real issues: 1. 98 fuel line could leak, lists 16 inch tires to go on 15 inch rims(DUH, this 16 in. tire is loose on a 15 in. rim and wont hold air), speed control cable, and glazing material.
So between 96-98 5 issues, 2 safety related for Ranger and 2 issues both safety related for Tacoma. Just puting things in perspective. . .
Saw 2 Broncos, F150s, Jeeps, S10s, Nissans, Polaris ATV, my Ranger and horses on that Trail. Still lookin for my first Tacoma runnin at altitude. . .
Why don't you ask the dealer in your area about the gas for the V6.
The dealers said OK to use regular gas. But it could be because they want to make the sale. jm
2. GLAZING MATERIAL STICKER
3. THROTTLE LINKAGES AND CONTROL
4. FUEL LINE HOSES NON METALLIC
5. EQUIPMENT CERTICATION LABEL
Lift gives you the ability to run bigger tires(more ground clearance), as well as longer wheel travel for better suspension articulation. This is key for rock crawling, or any other technical off-roading where the suspension is asked compress and stretch great lengths. Lift is also needed if you want to be a mud-bogger, but those people usually run huge tires 39"-plus, and often opt for full size trucks for the extra horse-power, and availability for suspension/body lift-kits that let them run up to 44" tires (I don't anything bigger than that is DOT approved in any state). Seeing as how the pre-runner is 2-wheel drive, even with the locker, you wont be doing any serious rock-crawling, or door deep mud bogging. The extra-travel would aid your truck in trail-running, or maybe playing in the dunes if you plan on jumping your new ride.
I guess my point is, your truck, if driven correctly will amaze you with what it can do and where it can take you, and unless the rig fails you (which I doubt) then why mess with a beautiful design that was engineered to work together by Toyota’s racing development team. I don't know about you but I think those guys have a better idea of what parts work together best then me.
And I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but warranty always needs to be considered before any modification, especially something like suspension. Cause If the truck breaks, and Toyota wont fix it, your talking thousands among thousands of dollars.
Spoog, go away, you don't even own a Tacoma!
Also, I notice the recalls are back on the board again. If anyone actually reads them, they will see for themselves that most are not even safety related and are duplicates. Also, the Ranger outsells the Tacoma 4 to 1!! That means for every Tacoma sold there are 4 Rangers sold. So if you look at it in a ratio of trucks sold to recalls, its pretty even!
When I arrived there were 91 messages on this board, you guys have been busy.
The clearence issue has to go.
With the rollover test, they tested a 1997 Ranger. This was before the new front suspension was introduced. Also, most people don't drive their trucks this way. And the Firestones are garbage they put on the Rangers. I always reccomend people change them asap.
The Ranger is the best, well rounded truck on the market today. Its ride is more comfortable than the Tacoma, yet it can take you into the hills.
Before I left for vacation a guy at work bought a 4cyl 4x4 Tacoma for $16,888. No A/C, no locker, very stripped. My Ranger XLT 4.0 5spd loaded was 19.6! When I showed him my truck and what I had on it he was not too happy. He just ran down to the Toyota dealer without shopping. He went through my Ranger with a fine tooth comb. He felt gipped and was contemplating a trade to a Ranger. I told him to keep it and do the double payment for at least 2 years, then trade. He got scammed!
The Ranger has been the best selling compact pickup for over 10 years. If it is so terrible and so inferior to the Tacoma don't you think after even 3 years the Toyota would be #1??
My 98 Ranger XLT 4x4 4.0 5spd has NEVER given me any problems offroading. I have listed site after site to rebute spoog's, hindsite, wns's, claim that all Rangers are unreliable and garbage. I am not going to list again.
It comes down to a simple question. How much offroading do you do? And how harsh of offroading do you do?
The Tacoma offers a locker, but at a stiff price for the TRD sticker! You can have a locker installed on a Ranger and still come out ahead prices wise over a Tacoma. It is no secret option for option the Tacoma is going to cost you more money. Even Edmunds says its not worth it in their review.
Will someone explain to me how the Ford Ranger can remain the #1 seller for 10+ straight years with all these quality issues?? Its not all based on price. I bought my second Ranger out of experience with my first. As you all know I went 94K with routine maintenance only, at sale it still ran fine. I know have about 18K on my 98 Ranger with not one problem???
Good Luck.
First, DO NOT ever refer to me as a liar on this board again. I have asked you twice. Next time I will request from Edmunds that you be removed from this board.
Second, I, unlike you, post the good and the bad from BOTH vehicles. I would ask you to do the same with more consistency.
Third, I have never questioned the very high quality of the Toyota vehicles. That was never in question on the references I posted from Consumer Reports et all. I DID have an 81 Toy truck that lunched an engine an tranny 5-6,000 miles past warranty and Toyota, basically, told me to stick it in my ear even though the complaints began BEFORE the end of the warranty and EVEN WHEN partially by my complaints, they changed the engine/tranny config. But all and all they produce very high quality vehicles.
I pulled the 20 technical service bulletins and recalls for the Tacoma for 1997 along with the ones I cited from the 96 Ranger. They list such things as CD overheats, cleaning the cassette, A/C odor, some system improvements, labels, paint stains and a reference, SS95-003, for Engine Support Bar Improvements. Now look back to my comment on the 96 Tacoma where the support bars were CRACKING which could cause loss of vehicle control. Does that make the Tacoma a bad vehicle? No, I don't think so but at least they offered an IMPROVEMENT in 97 Tacomas. . .
My MAIN POINT though spoog which I think you MISSED was that the MAJORITY of the service bulletins on BOTH vehicles are for nits or for items that are only common to a few vehicles.
In regard to comments on quality, I was mainly using the words of other sources, you know, Consumer Reports, Edmunds, Kelly Blue Book, Car and Driver, 4 Wheeler Magazine and I DID give the plus and minus for both vehicles. Check back to see for yourself.
I like my Ranger, I enjoy driving it having put 14,000 + miles in 7 1/2 months of driving. I suits my needs very well. I have not experienced any, other than the wiper switch, problems that you post. I haul 1,200-1,300 lbs of water in the bed, over dirt roads and have NO fear that it will flip on me or separate a tire from the rim. I performs EXCELLENT in the mountains, at altitude on 4x4 trails throughout the Sangre's. NEVER failed or balked on me. I have posted pictures that PROVE that. It is running great.
Now the best you have EVER told me about your Tacoma is that you race Rangers, get 3 tickets and THINK you can drive across a 12 inch board standing up on edge. You can't, it will hit that differential as it will hit mine on the Ranger.
I enjoy working with my truck, playing in my truck enjoying the beauty that is the Colorado high country in my truck and know, with out a doubt, that I got a high quality highly capable 4 wheel drive vehicle for the small amount I paid. And it has been in situations and 4 wheel drive areas that yours, based on your own postings, or lack there of, has never been.
They mainly didn't like the ride of the Tacoma in their report.
and tell me if he is sane.
Spousner writes:
" My MAIN POINT though spoog which I think you
MISSED was that the MAJORITY of the service
bulletins on BOTH vehicles are for nits or for
items that are only common to a few vehicles."
Once again, you belittle and try to dwindle down my non-manipulated numbers. I post
techical repair bulletin numbers and you denounce the facts. Let me inform you of something Cspousner, QUALITY *is* all about the nitpicks. It's the complete package. From the engine down
to the look of the dash after 2 weeks in the sun.
And what is your source to back up your claim that these Technical Service Buletins are only from a "few" vehicles???
You call the Technical Repair bulletins "nitpicks". Well, obviously the NHSTA doesn't seem to agree with you, and their not out to make
a buck.
Cspousner writes:
"In regard to comments on quality, I was mainly
using the words of other sources, you know,
Consumer Reports, Edmunds, Kelly Blue Book, Car and
Driver, 4 Wheeler Magazine and I DID give the plus
and minus for both vehicles. Check back to seefor yourself."
And how did these magazines test the quality?
Was there any LONG-TERM test data?
Which one of these magazines had the vehicle for a year or more?
Or were these basically test-drives, with the most thorough testing obivously being done by 4 Wheeler(in the offroad depo).
Consumer reports has not liked the Taco since 95 when it first came out. That 95 had some problems, but was quickly improved upon.
Cspousner writes:
"Second, I, unlike you, post the good and the bad
from BOTH vehicles. I would ask you to do the samewith more consistency."
Oh, I have. I have stated IN this forum that I like the current Rangers interior better, I think
*initially* its seats are more comfortable, and its a good value.
I have said that the Tacoma is better offroad,
has a tougher engineering philosophy, has less problems, and is a performance machine.
In fact, I feel I am possibly outgrowing
compact pickups. I have stopped growing, but
the shoulder room(or lack thereof) is starting to bother me. I was looking at the 91-97 Land Cruisers with the front, center, and rear locking diffs plus the insane clearance.
I don't know. I was toying(no pun intended)
with the idea of possibly just selling my Tacoma
for a used Jeep CJ-7(4,5 grand) and using the leftover cash for this land I want in Montana.
I still love my Taco, but when one of my buddies
or girlfriend are inside, the shoulder room
gets pretty weak. I sat in my buddies used Cj-7 and the Shoulder room seemed alot better.
This is it. What is with the sensor problems that I have been hearing about. I have 4 friends with 2 rangers and 2 b-series.(B's are essentially fords.) 3 of them have reported "check engine" light is perm. now on their console. When I asked, they said that ford sensors are bad, and that will result in a small loss in HP and mileage. Is this a commom occurance? 3 out of 4 people that I know have this problem? The last just got his truck 5 months ago, so he should not have any prob now. The others are a couple years old.
I am looking to buy the b-3000, but the mileage is at 18/23 normally. I can handle these numbers but anything lower is just unacceptable. Have you heard of any fix to this, or is it just a luck of the draw?
Thx for the time
Well I guess I am not a sane person in reference to Cpousnr's comment, but then I guess not many people are here in this topic.
"What Iwould like to know why does the Ranger have the
shocks at or below the rear differential? "
Because it wasn't engineered with offroading in mind. Ask the guys at Fourwheeler.com about that.
Good Luck.
Say hi to Winthrop, Medford, Ocean Bluff and Brookline....
Thanks.
"And how did these magazines test the quality?
Was there any LONG-TERM test data?
Which one of these magazines had the vehicle for a
year or more? Or were these basically test-drives, with the most thorough testing obivously being done by 4Wheeler(in the offroad depo)."
Well, Edmunds has had their Ranger for around a year in Colorado and LA. I did take quotes regarding quality from them. I do concede that most, for both Ranger and Tacoma are test drives and as I have stated before, are intended to SELL the vehicle. I these I enclude 4 wheeler, Motortrend, and most others, as they ACCEPT PAID ADVERTISMENT. Consumer Reports accepts NO paid advertisment.
"Consumer reports has not liked the Taco since 95
when it first came out. That 95 had some problems, but was quickly improved upon."
I have subscribed to Consumer Reports in excess of 15 years and keep all issues. Review of these issues does not support your assesment of their opinion of the Tacoma. In fact, they do have many positives, encluding the fact of the quality of the vehicle. Their main gripe, as I have stated, is the ride, price and the quality not being quite up to what they expect for a Toyota. Perhaps because it is assembled in the USA?
Yes, you have posted some positives regarding the Ranger. But the majority of the time you rant and rave regarding the lack of ability of the Ranger in 4 wheeling prompting me to tell you and show you in pictures that the Ranger does quite will at altitude, in heat, in sand, in mud, in water, up 20% difficult 4 wheel dirve roads. And what do I hear from you? You race Rangers from lights and aquire speeding tickets. That my friend speaks YARDS as to which vehicle is more capable.
I am going to offer a bet to you right now spoog and I am not a betting man unless I have a reasonable chance of winning. I also do not bet unless the wager is of sufficient magnatude to HUMBLE the looser.
You have at least 3 times stated with glee about the Ranger having the lowest clearance and the Tacoma having 12 inches clearance. While I do agree that the Tacoma is the highest clearance in the class of pickups, I will bet you now within one week I will prove your statements wrong.
Are you up for the bet? What will humble you? My certainty is 100%.
Hey man, your not causing trouble. You want to see where a Ranger can and does go? Go here:
http://members.aol.com/Cpousnr/index1.html
I will change the pics by this weekend with the 31X10.5X15 BF Goodrich tires on.
That Ranger is basically stock, has three 4 wheel drive passes in the Rockies in excess of 10,000 feet and one in excess of 9700 feet and multiple trips to the Rampart Range 4 wheel drive area in excess of 8,500 feet, hauls 200 gallons of water (1500lb) in a tank in the back and asks for more. Sold off the lot for $17,300 with add on's including the BFG's is a shade over 19K.
Only problem in 14,000 miles was a replacement to the windshild wiper swithch.
Or you can spend 21.5K for the Tacoma and beat Rangers at stop lights.
You say you own an F150 and you dont know that?
You egg spoog on with references to "keep it up" yet when I address clearance you say to move on.
That is because you KNOW the clearance on a Tacoma is not 12 inches but under 10 inches.
In their stats, they claim the 4x4 tacoma to
have 10.8 inches of ground clearance.
In the Ranger section they claim it has 7.4 inches.
Why don't you ask Edmunds why they are lying in their reviews.
"Inspired by its success in desert racing, a special TRD Off-Road package developed by Toyota Racing Development is available on 4X4 Xtracab models. It comes with front and rear Bilstein shock absorbers, locking rear differential, increased-rate front and rear springs, modified rear camber, larger stabilizer bar, big 31x10.5R15 white-lettered Goodyear tires, overfenders (color-keyed on Limited models) and a special off-road graphics package."
what does the Ranger "offroad" package come with?
control arm, and teched out."
And you have taken how many Rangers into 4 wheel drive situations? Zero I believe.
In regard to sensors, you may be thinking about the MAF sensor. There is a site, and I will get the URL later, that says that the MAF sensor MAY get deposits on it causing rough idle etc. The corrective action is to remove the sensor, spray it with carb cleaner, dry and reinstall.
barlitz:
A suggestion to you. Rangers can be rented. Not sure if that is true for the 4X4. Also, the library would have a copy of the December 1998 Consumer Reports where they reviewed the Ranger and Tacoma side by side. Also you can go here: http://www.go.com/Center/Automotive/ and you can get reviews on all the vehicles some back to 1996. To summerize them, both Ranger and Tacoma are liked with the only negatives per se being the price of the Tacoma. But go look for yourself.
spoog:
Well for the off road on Ranger you are suppose to get 16" rims, buldge body shocks (whatever they are), 265 tires, fog lights, 4.10 rearend, a decal and different mirrors. My choice was to buy the skids and install them myself. I plan on going with better shocks some day the Rancho RS 5000 or 9000 (which all reports I have read put the Bilstines in their place) and I got the BF Goodrich tires which, just by looking at them, put those Goodyear Wrangler's that you have in the catagory of an "agressive street tire" (my words but compare the two yourself).
In regard to over fenders, do you mean the non metalic material framing the fenders? That is standard on the Ranger.
Also even if Consumer Reports has been against the Tacoma as you state, please REMEMBER that CR gets its rating evaluations primarily from USEERS and OWNERS of the product rated. In this case, the owners of the Tacoma reported problems in certain areas such as "VEHICLE INTEGRITY" i.e. wind/water leaks, seal, rattles and squeaks etc. That does not mean YOU have those problems, but someone did.
hindsite:
Nah, your reasonably sane. But you did comment once, rightfully so, that posts on the Ranger board should not reference spoog. However, you have made NO comment regarding spoogs constaint visits to the Ranger board to blast the Ranger. I do not think you will see a post from me on the "Tacoma" board. Just balance it a bit.
at this point I've had it with the juvenile name calling.
Did Not! Did So! Ya mudda wears combat boots!
Knock it off! NOW!!!!
Y'AWL GET INTO IT AGAIN, AND I WILL "TIME OUT" THIS CONFERENCE FOR A WEEK!!!!!
THE VERY ANNOYED
Front Porch Philosopher
SUV, Pickup, & Aftermarket and Accessories Host
Most people however don't use their trucks, especially a 22K - 26K truck, as a hard offroad vehicle. You tell me who is going to take a new truck and trash it, scratch it, dent it in order to actually use the locker on the Tacoma???
I have taken my 98 Ranger XLT SC 4x4 into some pretty hairy areas, but always check to make sure the area will not damage my truck.
Dollar for dollar, option for option the Ranger is the better value/truck for the everyday user and the everyday camper, hiker, light offroader. The Tacoma is a nice truck don't get me wrong, but you will pay a hefty price for that TRD sticker and its options and image, this is no secret.
How did Edmunds and Toyota get their clearance data? Best I can determine is they drove the truck up on chunks of 2X4 and took the measurement.
You will get your answer if you go to the 4 Wheeler Truck of the Year 1998. They posted the correct clearance.
But that raises another issue. You used that test to support your stand regarding the Tacoma.
you DO realize that the Ranger they used was a shortbed, no-Supercab, AUTOMATIC transmission vehicle against a loaded TRD optioned, 5 sp manual tranmissioned Tacoma.
1. Do you think the automatic trans made a difference? The article said it did (go to the Mazda part).
2. Would the shortbed have a different approach/departure angle?
3. Do you think the geraring, which was a low point per se on the Ranger, is different between the automatic and the manual trans.?
4. The ONLY comments regarding the Pulse lock 4 wheel on the Ranger was that it worked great, 1st time every time, submurged in cold water, in dusty road conditions and that the testers PERFERED a floor shifter with a neutral position. They did not say that it was a weak point at all quite the contray they said it preformed flawlessly.
I DO appreciate your posts on comparisons. But when I see an error, I try to point to the direction of the data to correct the error. Now in that light, I would put a lift on a Ranger ONLY if I was going to go with bigger tires than the 31s. As to the front control arms, their design is very much the same it seems between the two vehicles and I see no need to replace it to go off-road, seeing as it performs very well off-road already. Its clearance at the wheel junction is basically identical to the TAR's now that I have 31s on.
sporin:
spoog or anyone is free to disagree with me. The liar reference was just uncalled for as I was presenting data in another light. There ARE duplicate entries in the data base he was getting information from and in my opinion if you identify the same issue, 5 times, you still have only one issue. I have, when presented with some errors in his postings, tried to point him to the correct data or taken the time to gather the data myself, first hand. Disagree but please be prepared to back it up with facts.