Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Ford Ranger vs Toyota Tacoma
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
If you can't argue about the merits of the trucks without getting personal about it, then it leaves me no choice.
PF Flyer
Host
Pickups & News & Views Message Boards
Unless you have a Ranger or Tacoma, don't show up in here (goodbye TBunder!). The Liberty is not a truck, it is an SUV. So take your discussions elsewhere.
Pluto - Don't know what you own, but unless it is a Tacoma, you need to get lost as well.
I think this forum is a riot, though, and the moderator should just let it go. It always brightens my day to see people going at each others throats over vehicles! Reminds me of the old days when I would fight Accord Coupe owners who thought my BMW M3 was inferior!
Ahhhhh the good ol days!
Obi
Stang - nothing on my 67 for now. It'll likely be a couple of years until I get really serious about it. I was looking at a Jegs catalog the other nite though. Would that be a good place to start, along with maybe some mustang websites? I know alot of folks like to keep their cars stock, and some turn them into lightning fast rigs like yours - I wanna stay somewhere in the middle. Whatever I do, it will have to stay very streetable, but very sporty and, most importantly, that nasty light yellow color. LOL. Kinda like a face only a mother could love.
And on another note, not trying to show my [non-permissible content removed] or anything, but what is wrong with what is going one here that would envoke suspension from the mods. I mean, sure it gets monotonous and a little off topic - but are we causing some loss of money on Edmunds part? The last week or so has been the busiest I can remember for this topic, and there hasn't been any blatant wrongs done I my eyes. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong.
Recalls notwithstanding, there are some differences that make it easy for me to choose the Ranger over the Taco every time I need to drive one. Most of these difference involve the driver experience.
The Taco is the most uncomfortable seat on the planet. It's too low, zero support and gives me a backache in 2 miles. It is also the most least fun to drive truck of the two. Very plain, unexciting and cheap feeling to me.
The Ford has zip, handles better, sits comfortably and is fun to drive.
Beyond these personal preferences, there's not a dimes worth of difference between the two. They're both great little trucks.
curb weight- 4x4 liberty: 3857 lbs.
curb weight- 4x4 tacoma xtra cab: 3540 lbs. hmmm....600 lbs. in favor of the tacoma? lmao
rear diff. size- 4x4 or 4x2 liberty- 8.25" (DANA)
rear diff. size- 4x4 V6 tacoma 4x4- 8.25" (crap)
hmmmm again...can you say wrong plutonium?
as far as comparing sheetmetal and a "truck frame" to the liberty's high strength sheetmetal and welded (together) sheets of uniframe, i do not think you want to go there. if anyone would be cracking and twisting on the trails, common sense should tell you that that would be you. here, read this article. you may learn something- maybe the difference in tacoma's pop can sheetmetal compared to liberty's high strength alloy steel.
http://www.car-buying-strategies.com/2002-Jeep-Liberty-safety.html
also you diss the liberty for problem issues. well, in it's first year of production, it had only two recalls. the same number the tacoma had in it's first year in '95. tsb's don't mean anything. i honestly think that toyota is too arrogant to post as many tsb's as it could. same with the recalls.
you also say the DOHC design is better than the "old ancient" design of the SOHC. well, if this is true why doesn't your tacoma engine make more power and torque than my "old and ancient" 3.7 liter jeep engine? it's got the "superior" DOHC design and is still down 20 horse and 15 lb/ft of torque. and really, the 3.7 is just the jeep GC V8 (4.7 i believe) that has been hailed by many auto enthusiasts as one of the best V8's produced. plus, even tacoma owners are complaining of how rough and loud the DOHC design 3.4 tacoma engine is.
i don't know what you were thinking when you posted your mis-information about the jeep and tacoma, but surely you can do better research than that. as far as your other babbling, like stang said, you are like spam. you don't even make sense. i like how you still haven't replied to any of the posts i wrote showing how the liberty has a greater gvwr rating than tacoma 4x4, how it has better approach/departure angles than any tacoma, even Regular Cabs. and how it gets better mileage, has more power and torque, and serious off-road hardware like real towhooks- front and rear, dana axles all around, iron steering knuckle, cast iron lower a-arms, forged steel upper a-arms, real skidplates and not the ones mounted to the component they're protecting like your cheap tacoma incorporates, i could go on and on, but i know you won't reply.
oh yeah, my flares haven't fallen off either like the 2002 tacoma's are evidently doing. hilarious.
better luck next time my man. as i say, don't you just hate facts? especially when you haven't checked them.
serious offroad hardware:
1. real towhooks. Post some info where it says Tacoma towhooks aren't real. If I remember correctly, Liberty has towhooks as an option, and not standard equipment (Imagine that! On a Jeep!). HOw much did you pay for towhooks? I just went down to the nearest 4WheelParts store and got me some.
2. Dana axles: it's a jeep, what do you expect? And Danas arent invulnerable.
3. A-arms: here you go again, making things up. Just because having overbuilt components makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside, does not mean it's a good thing. I say for the tenth time: show me some Tacoma with failed A-arms.
4. Skidplates: well, can't say anything here.
5. Fender flares: You said "Tacoma's", plural. So far it was a one single "Tacoma". Uno. It's October of 2002, and there is so far one single Tacoma with that problem in 2002.
Quit making up things. You generalize on one occurence. If that's the case, Ranger now comes with a 6-CD changer that melts CDs. Yes, there was a single occurence of that, but according to your approach, 2001 Rangers are now melting CDs.
I haven't heard any reply about how DC now sells it in extra-pimp version with 17" Chrome wheels.
Let's see, we have exaggerated claims of curb weight, differential sizes, frame strength, engine performance, etc.
C'mon, even with your limited memory, this should ring a bell to you. Aren't these the same things you lied about when you made Tacoma and Ranger comparisons?
I've been in two rear-end collisions as a passenger and even with headrests, it was ugly. The Ranger's "surf-board" seatback only extends to the base of my neck; I can only imagine what a good rear-ender could do.
**TBUNDY** can post his usual nonsense again about this - the Ranger's seatback and the Tacoma's are the same height off the floor. Even if its true and not another home-grown lie, it doesn't change the fact the Ford's seatback is an unsafe design.
I'm surprised the government and insurance companies doen't require a headrest.
Tacoma's aren't fun to drive? I've had a ball for the past four+ years driving mine. Older tests showed the Tacoma beat the Ranger in every performance category - acceleration, cornering, braking and off-roading. Maybe the Ranger is now on par with the Tacoma's acceleration but unless the suspension has changed, it will still take a back-seat to the Tacoma's handling.
Just differences in opinion...
as far as the "pimpy looking" 17's, i don't see the light in that one. the F150 has been using 17's for seven years. are they pimpy? so if you consider anything chromed "pimpy", you better go spray paint your chrome tacoma bumpers. they look "pimpy" after all.
i am done throwing facts your way that you can't defend. it is a waste of my time. you guys have swayed all of them and personally, i find it quite hilarious.
about the "one owner" who has flares falling off. well, i am the only owner who had a bad fuel pump. and you all gave me crap for that. and i didn't even have to tell you.
pluto- blah about the head restraints on the ranger- they're just as high as any tacoma. come to my house and we'll go to some dealers and measure together. you are the one making stuff up.
scorp- making stuff up? i stated fact after fact- and you and pluto both have ignored to comment. how about pluto's theory that his DOHC design is far better when my old SOHC makes more power and torque, gets better fuel mileage, and has been hailed (in it's V8 config) as being one of the smoothest and most powerful V8's ever to grace a truck. i guess it's "power robbing" balancer doesn't rob as much as toyota's, eh? )- busting a gut here guys!!!!
oh yeah- approach angle is just that. and you were wrong on the RC thingy. am i not right?
And my bumper is not chrome, but color-coded, so my truck is silver all way around.
One owner with fender flare problem (and how you immediately jump to saying "fender flares falling off on 2002 Tacomas"): this is a prime example of you making things up. Should I point out another one? In the Liberty forums you said something like "But since 4Runners have an issue with sludged up engines I would stay away from them". Since you know perfectly well its not true, you are making things up.
I don't know about the V6 vs V8 discussion, nor do I care. Take it up with pluto. And what RC thingy is that?
Truth is: half of your facts are fiction. The Benz-like practices of building Liberties (while defending the huge number of recalls as being "early builds"...I wonder if Mercedes Benz sells horribly built expensive cars the first year and then tells people "Sorry....this is our first year building this"), the overgeneralization of a single problem (remember.....the fuel pump is being brought up because you posted the links about Benz practices), none of this is adding any credibility to what you are saying.
what about that gvwr thing? RC thingy is you saying the RC taco having better approach angles than lib. isn't true as i've provided the facts that again, go against you. lmao
Liberty recalls: yes, you didn't write the quote, but you posted that link so many times it's obvious you like what that article says. For a vehicle that is built, according to that article, with traditions of Mercedes Benz, the list of problems is just too long.
RC thingy: you went on and on about how Liberty would walk all over Tacome because it has shorter wheelbase. RC has wheelbase even shorter than Liberty. That's the RC thingy. I'm not arguying about approach angles. As I said, I am skeptical about the small tires. I've seen Liberty with 3" of lift try to climb up a ledge, it was not pretty.
Behind your trademark Jeep grill and underneath all that "Ken & Barbie" foo-foo, you have just another cute-ute like all the rest. While I'm ecstatic you like your little cute-ute, I find it amusing you keep trying to convince us that it's something it's not - a "real" Jeep.
I have also noted you have done your best to compare Ranger FX4s, S-10 ZR2s, Wranglers, Libertys etc. to the Tacoma. Just goes to show when you're #1, somebody's always trying to challenge you.
If you had bought a Wrangler and were making the same claims to grandeur as you've done with your Liberty, maybe somebody here would take you seriously. Until then, you need to swallow your pride and acknowledge the fact the Liberty isn't in the same league as a Tacoma TRD or Wrangler.
Hence, it is overweight and has that "SOFT" look about it.
If you want to offroad, get a real off roader.
also, i'd love to read it's historic development. could you direct me to it? also, it's "overweight" simply because it's built like a sherman tank. it employs high strength sheetmetals and alloys. funny how you say it's "overweight", but pluto doesn't even think it weighs as much as you guys' tacomas.
pluto- it's good to see you want to throw in the towel. you say i don't have a real off-roader. and it's just another cute ute. well, would you please tell me what other cute utes employ dana axles all around, a real direct shift transfer case (more real than your electronic one), real skidplates and not skinny metal like your tacoma ones that are bolted to the component they're protecting like your tacoma's- did you think of that design? how about my trac-loc rear diff, real towhooks-front and rear, more powerful engine than your "superior design" DOHC design truck has(laughable), not to mention it's awesome approach and departure angles and it's 10.2 ground clearance. nah, it's not a real off-roader. lmao
did you finally realize you didn't have a 12" rear diff? you know, one that's "at least" 4" larger than my jeep's dana? how about those weight numbers you thought up? hilarious.
ill agree that the liberty isn't in the same ballpark with the wrangler, but nothing is. the reason your trd tied the wrangler in that test is because the wrangler was an open diff as stang pointed out to you. are you bragging your trd tied an open diff'd wrangler? that's pathetic.
the new rubicon will stomp any other 4x4 production vehicle ever built. it has no competition. and the reason i compare all those vehicles to your trd is because this is the name of the game around here. you know, toyota tacoma vs. ford ranger? and im defending my jeep to you guys because you people called it a mallrunner.
also, i notice no comment on the DOHC 'superiority' design compared to my more powerful and more fuel efficient old and crappy SOHC balanced V6. LOL
According to IIHS, the Liberty has a much better safety structure.
www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0127.htm
According to NHTSA, The liberty mops up the Tacoma. 5 star to Tacoma's 3 star.
http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/testing/ncap/
Any pix of the accident? What type was it? head-on/T-bone/?
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0127.htm
The IIHS rated the Tacoma overall as acceptable:
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/98003.htm
In this case, I think h0udini's observations concur with what the IIHS reported. Go ahead and provide us with your skewed interpretations of the IIHS' results - they don't change the fact the IIHS rated the Tacoma higher.
I suppose you've self-appointed yourself as IIHS' crash test analyst after you were impeached as our self-appointed moderator, huh? Oh well, at least you haven't lost your loyal supporter **TBUNDY**
I still think IIHS results have more practical use for head-on collisions, the only thing NHTSA results are good for is side collisions.
What I said was concerning "Structure/safety cage". Librerty: Good, Tacoma: Acceptable. However, I should have added "in their respective vehicle classes".
Also you need to be a bit more thorough on the websites you link to. The IIHS site itself says "Test results can be compared only among vehicles of similar weight."
Right next to each crash result is the statement "IMPORTANT: Compared with other midsize utility vehicles--compare ratings only among vehicles of similar weight"
The regular cab Tacoma at around 2700 pounds is much lighter than the Liberty at an estimated 4100 pounds.
That weight is published neatly on the left side of the pages you provided links for.
So any conclusion you make is unfortunately, invalid.
Also IIHS kindly suggests that "[NHTSA] and [IIHS]tests complement each other", and as an informed consumer, you should look at the big picture, not just one orgnaization.
I believe your little lecture would be more appropriately aimed at **TBUNDY**, after all, he started the nonsense. Of course, such an obvious conclusion is all but invisible through your biased eyes.
Plus with the unrespectful statements you made in the last two paragraphs of your post #73, and the last paragraph in #76, I am much more likely to not see your side of any argument. You can't insult me and ask me to see your side in the same post.
Scorpio--->NHTSA crash results are better for full collisions(front or side), while IIHS only does off-set collisions(front only). "Full" being defined as the entire front of the vehicle being hit, and off-set where only a foot or two of the vehicle is hit. All taken with a grain of salt, the sum of such information is much more valuable than any one test alone.
Good luck with your Jeep. I think it has a GREAT motor, and never said otherwise.
And I saw the numbers on the new I5 for GM, and that thing is weak! Much worse IMO, than the current 4.3L. 215HP @ 5600 and 225 @ 2800. Not bad, but not what I expected either.
"I still think the Liberty is overweight and underpowered."
"Good luck with your Jeep. I think it has a GREAT motor, and never said otherwise."
unless you are being sarcastic, i don't know what you mean. and as far as "underpowered", it currently has the highest horsepower in its class of any V6 offered by any manufacturer. how can that be underpowered.
however the "german automaker" (last time i checked chrysler was an american automaker, owned by a foreign company) markets the liberty, it must be working as it is selling very well. i like the truck. it has everything i consider a 4x4 to have, and it will go anywhere i will ever want to take it. plus, it will haul my family to the grocery store and prevent me from plowing my driveway this winter as im sure it will laugh at snow with my new BFG's. you may want to check out www.pickuptruck.com, there is an article on the predicted crew cab tundra due out as an '04 model.
as you described it, the liberty exploded or had its guts lying all over the pavement or something. this statement i ponder, because according to the IIHS, the liberty has a higher rated safety cage. iow, the cage or passenger compartment is stronger on the liberty (a no brainer since the lib has welded sheets of high strength alloy steels underneath running the length of the vehicle as well as the roll cage under the roof). so im trying to figure out how a tacoma, which, according to the IIHS site (pluto's fave), is 1400 lbs. lighter than the 4100 lb. liberty. to be more accurate, the taco, which is actually only 300 lbs lighter (varying by model- RC 4x2 is 2700 lbs. according to IIHS) (all libs are the same weight) made the liberty "explode" and lay it's innards on the pavement. i won't debate this little scenario, i just hope no one got hurt. but it just sounds a little far fetched. of course, jmo.
also, the NHTSA gives the lib five stars on front and side impacts. the taco got three starts.
hint: the liberty and tacoma share the same sized rear axles- 8.25. LOL
also, still wondering what your take is on why my "old design" SOHC 3.7L engine makes more horsepower, torque and gets better mileage when compared to the "superior design" of your DOHC 3.4L. it shouldn't according to your theory, right? could you please explain to the forum why this is an exception? plagiarize an article or something. im dying to know what you find out. ;O)
If you can't recognize those exaggerated claims in my "tbundyish" post as a joke, well, the joke's even more on you, bub!
Do you want to talk engines? Fine. Consider this:
Tacoma's 3.4 V6:
Horsepower 190 hp @ 4800 rpm
Torque 220 lb.-ft. @ 3600 rpm
Liberty's 3.7 V6:
Horsepower 210 @ 5000 RPM
Torque (lb-ft) 235 @ 4400 RPM
That's pitiful. You have to go 800 RPMs higher to get a measly 15 more lb/ft torque in a BIGGER, NEWER engine! No thanks, you can keep your 3.7! That's because, like it or not, you do not have an advanced V6. With this kind of pathetic competition, it makes me wonder why Toyota even bothering developing their 4.0 V6.
Now let's add insult to injury. You stated your Liberty weighs 4100lbs (I'm just going to use your figure without researching, no matter how inaccurate it may be). According to Edmunds, a V6 4x4 Tacoma Ex-cab - http://www.edmunds.com/new/2003/toyota/tacoma/2drxtracabv64wdsb34l6cyl5m/specs.html?id=lin0018 - so you don't accuse me of plagiarizing - weighs 3515 pounds. This breaks down to:
Liberty: 19.52lbs per 1 horsepower
Tacoma: 18.5lbs per 1 horsepower
You see, your Liberty's pork-like curb weight completely cancels out its puny power advantage. Like so many people, it's overweight and underpowered (no offense if that applies to you). Maybe you need to strip that thing of all its foo-foo.
Now would you please post something that relates to this topic? Last time I checked, a Liberty wasn't a Ranger.
Even Taco DC, with its 3700 lbs of weight, has a slightly better ratio than Liberty.
Best part?
"MB admits no liability and is settling "to avoid lengthy and expensive litigation""
I guess having a vehicle built in "best traditions of Mercedes Benz" is not as good as it seems....
These are two totally differnt vehicles. One is an SUV, the other a truck??
Powerful and torquey engine: I believe that was covered few posts up, Libertys' power to weight ratio is worse than Tacoma, even DC.
Dana axles: Dana is Dana, no question. It's not indestructable. For purposes of Liberty, Dana axles are an overkill. Lets not forget that it's also IFS.
Departure/Entry angles and lower gear ratio: that's basically the only thing you got going for you.
Offroad package with 4.10 gearing: so what? Manual tranny Taco is 3.93, and auto is 4.10. That's with or without TRD.
Liberty HAD a chance to be a good offroad vehicle, but blew it.
comparing torque between the 3.7 and 3.4:
jeep: 15.74 lb/ft per CC.
toyota: 15.45 lb/ft per CC.
it seems that you toyota guys have forgotten what is important in a 4x4- torque. even the SOHC 4.0 Ford has the toyota beat at 16.32 lb/ft per CC. you bring up a pretty pathetic argument, and one you haven't done your homework on evidently.
and please stop misleading people. the liberty has 10.2 inches of GC compared to tacoma's standard "claimed" 10.8. and a TRD with 12 inches. although im still trying to figure out where there is 12" of GC other from frame to ground, and in that case i have 13" on my jeep.
and im still trying to figure out how jeep "blew it". same coil over your toyota has, dana axles, real towhooks and skidplates. please explain how jeep blew it, as you say.
Ground clearance: Alright, the numbers I quoted are the LLL, which is 13" for you and 15" for Tacoma. You said it was because of bigger tires...there is not 2" of diff. between 30s and 31s. 2002 Liberty is sitting lower, and 2003s are sitting even lower.
real towhooks: why don't you quit this stupid line. Your Liberty has towhooks as an OPTION. Same as me going to 4WheelParts and getting them.
Jeep blew it because they had all this potential, and they ended up with a mallrunner. Heavy with luxuries, dinky tires, can't put a decent lift on it. Now DC came out with 17" Chrome wheels for it. It's not a "mini-Rubicon". Grocery hooks, lipstick holders....pretty plastic-enclosed lights on the roof.
As for slamming a Dana-axles 4x4: (with IFS): it sounds good, but it's not all that great. Danas break. In fact, it was the Dana 44 that blew at Tellico, the only axle lost there. Toyota axles held, Dana gave up.
toyota: 15.45 lb/ft per CC.
it seems that you toyota guys have forgotten what is important in a 4x4- torque."
>>Are you really going to tell us that your extra 15 lb/ft of torque is an advantage when your Liberty weighs a whopping 585 lbs more than our Tacomas?
You're the first person I've known who's rated an engine using a torque/displacement ratio. The fact you're doing this, instead of using the universally standard torque/RPM ratio simply means you're grasping at straws. Remember your Ranger debate? How more torque at a LOWER RPM was the most important thing in the world? What happened to that argument?
The most important thing in a 4x4 is power, lightweight, articulation and big tires. The winning formula isn't simply having a torque advantage.
Come back and preach to us about your HP and torque advantage when your Liberty sheds 600lbs of Ken & Barbie foo-foo.
-------------------------------------------------
As a sidenote, let me tell you I think it's hilarious how you brag about one thing only to do a complete 180 degree "about-face" later. Need a few reminders?
1. You bragged about your Ranger's locker, found out it didn't have one, then said they suck because that's what the Tacoma has.
2. You bragged non-stop about how the Ranger had more torque at a lower RPM. Now you say that's a bogus comparison and use some lame torque/cc argument because the Tacoma's got you beat.
3. You bragged nonstop about your precious Alcoa rims that were light-weight and reduced unsprung weight. Then you bragged about your bigger, heavier axles, A-arms and diffs, completely contradicting yourself with your asinine "reduced unsprung weight" garbage. Who would care about having lighter rims to reduce unsprung weight on a 4x4 with live axles and big tires, LMFAO!
4. You griped non-stop about how Tacomas (supposedly) had a leaking problem but simply ignore your Liberty's TSB regarding interior leaks through a drain tube.
5. You bragged nonstop about how tough your Ranger was and how you would literally jump it. Then when you sold it on E-bay, your advertisement stated "the truck was never abused."
5. You're quick to call anybody around here stupid when they don't agree with you, while you're the only one here who forgot HIS OWN USERNAME AND PASSWORD and had to re-register.
Need me to go on, or have you had enough yet?
you were the one who said the taco outweighed the liberty....quickly, you recant your quote calling it "a huge joke". alrighty........
you were the one who claimed to have a 4" advantage over liberty rear diff......quickly learning you were misinformed- again........
you were the one who said DOHC was better than SOHC designed engines, only to learn that the jeep engine makes more power and torque and is more efficient- you quickly quieted down......
you were the one who claimed you had a lsd in your rear locked taco diff....only to learn you were wrong- again, quickly quieted down.......
a long time ago when i mis-stated (see, i admit my mistakes) that the ranger had tacoma beat in curb weight by some 400 lbs., you and your toyota comrades quickly jumped on me saying i was wrong and that the ranger was pretty much even in weight to the lighter tacoma (obviously if being lighter was better- which is your theory now-, you would've agreed that ranger was heavier, and therefore not as good a 4x4).
but now, you say that being lighter is the way to go. which is it? i know, whichever works in your favor, right?
again, i just pointed out to you that the 3.7 makes more torque per CC compared to your wimpy 3.4- and then you totally change the subject to say that it doesn't mean anything.....well, it means that your theory on the DOHC design was DEFINITELY not plagiarized.....no one but you would think up such BS.
only you quote a magazine article that is going on six years old where your precious tacoma tied a wrangler with an OPEN DIFFERENTIAL. now if that isn't pathetic, i don't know what is...
daily your fellow toyota comrades sit in here and read your nonsense and obviously do not support you in any way.....half the time quietly trying to explain to you how things really are....
my man, i won't call you s8u8i4, but you are the epitome of a trucker that knows nothing but what you think, and is totally blind to anything else or anyone's explanation of the truth.
'Need me to go on, or have you had enough yet?'
okay, ill go on....the reason im pointing out to you that the 3.7 makes more torque per CC is because of your claim that the DOHC design is better as a whole- iow, the engine. well, if that was true, where's the torque in the 3.4? after all, it is DOHC design, but the SOHC designed jeep 3.7 still has it beat in total lb/ft of torque per cubic centimeter. and it does all of that while being more fuel efficient. your theory just doesn't float my man.
also, it's finally good to see you are accepting some of the ranger's advantages over tacoma.
also, i never had alcoa rims; the FX4 levle II comes with them. i just said what someone else did, which their purpose is to reduce unsprung weight, plus they are FORGED which means they are a lot stronger than your TRD's cast.
'The most important thing in a 4x4 is power, lightweight, articulation and big tires. The winning formula isn't simply having a torque advantage.'
evidently you don't agree with your comrades like scorpio who brag up the toyota weakling 4-banger in tacoma. also, big tires aren't everything. it simply depends on where you're driving. for rock-crawling and mudding, taller tires will help. but for some trailing, smaller tires will actually be better. i can't believe you would make such a blanket statement like that one. im not surprised though, it's obvious that you think your 31's rule and they are the best simply cuz they look good. can you say inexperienced? also, torque is what pulls you up the hill or through the mud my main man. it will also pull out the torque low toyotas. peace bro.
END OF POST #42
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>If you try real hard and concentrate, you'll find this was a joke because I'm totally imitating your nonsensical garbage. You need to lay off the medication and learn to develop a sense of humor so you can recognize a joke when it slaps you in the face.