Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Toyota TACOMA vs Ford RANGER - V
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
I don't belive resale is that subjective. It is a very variabled equation, but it can be measured. See what happens when you go to trade in. A foreign car in good shape will almost always demand more than it's big 3 equivilant. Just the fact of availability will prove this point. Ford's are a dime a dozen, and the value you may get up front will bite you in the [non-permissible content removed], when you trade in. Ask any used car dealer and/or buyer at a dealership.
My .02
-wsn
But, You can't measure handling. Therefore, it is subjective and a matter of personal opinion.
How can you measure how balanced a car feels? How can you measure the road feel through the steering wheel? How can you measure how well a manufacturer meshes everything together in a package?
Everyone has their own personal preferences too. I might think that a Porsche handles better than a Pinto, but there's probably some people out there somewhere who disagree. They're not wrong. They just have a different opinion.
(1) sell yourself vs. trade
(2) trade to same mfgr or competing
(3) maintenance
(4) geographic area
(5) supply vs. demand
(6) vehicle configuration
(7) KBB or NADA prices may be substantially off
(8) price paid for original vehicle
(9) redesigned model out yet?
(10) number and proximity of dealerships
(11) rebates, special financing & other incentives
And that's just what I can think of in 2 minutes.
A head to head COMPARISON test that relies on data and testing like 0-60, braking, ect IS NOT SUBJECTIVE. IT is real factual data.
I understand that your Ranger's offroad ability is good enough for you. But for others, it isn't. Paying an extra 2k for the Tacoma is a good choice for those that want more.
YoOu and Vince need to stop using this line:
" The average customer doesn't use this"
Please stop using that excuse. It's only making your argument weaker, and IN FACT implying that the Ranger specializes in nothing, which is Edmunds main comlaint with FORD.
incredibly reliable the past ten years. did you
forget about that head gasket problem? what about
the bodies that rust out in just a few years? "
That was on the older models Cthomp. Come on man, look at the data. Their reliability rankings in all magazine are EXCELLENT. Look at the NHSTA data. IT's amazing. They ARE the most reliable truck made, PERIOD. There is no quation about it.
Im not sure where the NISSAN stands but I am sure it is close.
Look at that Jd Powers 5 year reliability study that was just posted here. Toyota trucks and SUV's WON EVERY category! The whole thing was Tacoma, 4runner and t-100, with a Mazda pickup thrown in as well(93). They totaly dominated. Coincidence? I don't think so. THATS a five year study my man. Totally objective.
As for the Tacoma, it beat the Ranger in every single perfromance category in the 4wheeler.com head to head. And offroad handling can be objective. A vehicle that has problems traversing terrain and bounces all over the place , and a vehicle that just flies and excells over the same terrain with the SAMe driver is basically proven as fact.
A Porsche handles better than a Pinto there is no denying that. It is pure fact. Any idiot can figure that out by just driving one, let alone doing the cone test.
Please stop splitting hairs Cthomp, it's dong a diservice to you.
"Fact:
The Toyota compacts have incredible reliability
ratings the past ten years"
FALSE, unless you consider blown head gaskets and rusting bodies falling off the truck to be signs of reliability.
Okay. Tell me the MEASUREMENT for HANDLING. That's right! There isn't one! It CANNOT be quantified! Therefore, it is subjective and a function of opinion.
Some aspects (skid-pad forces and braking) can be quantified. But, there are so many more aspects of handling that can't.
BTW 92,000 recalls for the head gasket problem for one year in particular.
Would an elderly gentleman prefer the 'handling' of a Porsche over a Cadillac?
Would a 16-year-old prefer the 'handling' of a Cadillac over a Porsche?
I believe that the Taco is a better off-roader than the Ranger. But, just because a magazine says so doesn't it true.
Spoog, as far as resale please go to Kelly Blue Book and start punching numbers of like Rangers vs Tacoma's you may be surprised. I know I have mentioned in the past a friend of mine deals with selling/buying cars/trucks at wholesale to and from dealers. He says resale depends greatly on region and market area. He also says that Toyota/Honda are loosing the resale advantage. The percentage has dropped over the last 4 years and shows no sign of going up. California for instance, has thousands and thousands of Toyota's and Honda's to choose from, Wisconsin does not.
The Tundra just doesn't cut it as a real work truck. As much as Toyota wants to push it as a full size the dimensions say otherwise. The backseat is an absolute joke, no limited slip rearend available, same axle and driveline used in Tacoma. Sales have also leveled off, people are finding out the truth.
But, just because a magazine says so doesn't make it the 100% truth.
the above, they will; postulate that the test was performed by a magazine, tries to trivialize that the comparison was inaccurate and therefore meaningless, discount the article as invalid due to differences in the options, and will just skirt the issue.
The magazines PROVED the Tacoma is the better offroader. How would you react if I said that becuase the NHSTA says the Ranger is safer in side crashes, that it doesnt mean it is so? Do you see how silly your logic and argument has become?
Hey Cthompson, farmer John called. He wants you to stop grasping at all his straw.
NO question are they more reliable than anything by Ford, Chevy ect. All the data proves it, time and time again.
THEY ARE THE MOST RELIABLE TRUCK MADE, PERIOD.
I would appreciate it if you would let me know if you are arguing because you care about the topic, or because you just enjoy to argue. If the latter, I have no need to correspond with you any longer.
There is no personal opinion involved in realizing that the 300ZX handles better than the truck or the average car. A vehicle that can turn at a greater speed with complete control is a better handling vehicle. You example of someone preferring a Cadillac to a Porsche would only apply to softness of ride, not handling.
You're suggesting that the best handling vehicle is the one that can take a 90 degree corner at the fastest speed???
Don't you think this is incredibly simplistic? Don't you think that there's a whole multitude of factors involved?
By your logic I can simply look at the skid-pad G's to determine whether a Porsche 911, Acura NSX, Ferarri, Viper, or whatever exotic is the best handling vehicle.
Come on. We both know you're a helluva lot smarter than that. Isn't that where your handle came from? )
"they had issues with the gaskets, and the pre 92 trucks had issues with bed rust. They STILL were the most reliable truck made, simply far ahead of the pack."
Have you gone absolutely CRAZY??? Blown engines and bodies falling off from rust??? You consider this to be "the most reliable truck made"???
Just tell me how many old Toyota compacts you see around Chicago. That's right. It's a getting pretty rare. This from "the most reliable truck made"? It can't even last 10yrs?
Dont trust a man whose pockets are lined in gold.
You need to look at the big picture. The best handling vehicle is not the one with the fastest lap times or can pull the most G's on the skid-pad. Ride firmness or lack thereof is also part of the equation.
EVERYBODY has their own OPINION about which vehicle handles the best in many different conditions, terrain, and situation. There is NO quantative measure. Why don't you understand?
BTW, I never said that a Caddy has better feel out on a roadcourse. I can't figure out where you got that from. I think you're gravely misquoting me here. I only said that it's very likely that Mr. Wipple down in his Florida retirement home is going to prefer the handling of that Caddy over a Porsche.
Just a little example for you. About a year ago, Car and Driver had a little article about the best handling car available in America. They had a Ferarri, Acura NSX, Porsche 911, C5 Corvette, Dodge Viper GTS, a BMW M3, and a few other semi-exotics to exotics.
Do you know which one they believed to be the best handling car in America? Almost unbelievably they chose the BMW M3. It came nowhere near the G's of the NSX or Viper. It also had the fewest ponies of the bunch by far. It turned in mediocre lap times and other performance data like 0-60, 1/4 mile, and 60-0 distance.
Whyever do you suppose they chose a 45K semi-exotic 4dr sedan as the best handling car in America over pure-bred exotic sports cars costing many times more???
Before all you guys start lambasting me over bringing up a mag comparo, I'm not saying I agree or disagree with their results. I only wish I was out there as one of the judges wringing out those cars on the track. It's merely support to my argument that handling IS subjective. Obviously, the testers from C&D agree.
;o)
BTW, my car is an SVT Contour. It can take a 90 degree curve at 35+ mph. Do I believe that it would handle better than a 300Z? Probably not. But, that's just my opinion. I'm sure there are pleanty of people out there who would agree or disagree with me.
It seems as if you think that handling is only cornering ability. There is so much more to it. I would think that anyone who has spent time at the track would know this.
Exactly what is this "double-talk" to which you are referring?
It is clear from your post or posts that a vehicle that can turn at a greater speed is the better handling vehicle and not trying to turn at 35 MPH on a 90 degree turn. You hit the nail directly on the head.
One of the laws of physics is body moves from a state of rest or uniform motion in a straight line will continue on that straight line.
Also, the there are several factors; short wheel base will generally turn faster, center of gravity plays, the turning radius of the vehicle,
different pavements have different frictional values, and tire contact.
And yes, I think some retired guy in Florida would much rather have the cushy feel of the Cadillac to the rock-solid feel of the Porsche. Unless, of course, he's/she's having some retired-crisis type of thing going on and they feel the need to prove how "young" they are to the rest of the retirement community. Go to any retirement community near you and take a census of what kinda cars are being driven. Caddys, Mercedes and BMWs will probably dominate. Not Porsches, Vipers or Tacomas.
http://www.caranddriver.com/FrameSet/0,1350,_sl_NewArticle_sl_0_cm_1633_cm_631_1_16_cm_00,00.html
Hind, according to you and Allknowing, they could have just driven the cars around a single corner to see which is fastest to give their choice for the best handling car. That would have taken about 5 minutes. What were they thinking???
As for reliability, www.carpoint.msn.com says otherwise about Toyota truck reliability, why? Why is it when someone posts data that says otherwise its immediatly disregarded, as with the crash test results. Tacoma finishes pretty poorly, www.crashtest.com, and carpoint both have the same data showing the Tacoma is terrible in crashtest results.
Hind, I did prove I live in the NW, take another look bud, I have an Oregon license plate, signs showing how far to MT. Hood, along with my truck in the picture of MT. Hood what more can you ask for????!!!
Just as an FYI to Ranger owners also. In Oregon we can't pump our own fuel. I pulled away from the pump and my check engine light came on. I pulled over immediatly and started checking my engine. Oil pressure fine, fluids ok, engine running good. I remembered a blurb from another internet site I read about how your fuel cap not being on tight can cause the engine light to come on. So I checked the fuel cap and the guy had barely put it on.
lol.
If your "proof" is blown engines and bodies falling apart from rust, there you go.
-C
That's why handling is SUBJECTIVE.
Can you tell me why they just didn't drive all of the cars through a single corner to delare the winner?
Can you tell me why they picked a car as the best handling car for over $30,000 that didn't place first in a single one of their tests?
All you guys have to do is write "handling is subjective" (and mean it, as you know it's true) and I'll shut up about it already.
As far as reliability. My old 88 Toyota p-up 4x4 is rusted out but it is by all means reliable. I drove it from NC to New Orleans to Arizona to California to Vancuver and back to NC via Colorodo last Spring at this exact same time (it almost makes me cry sonsidering I am hammering away at a computer all day now) and would trust it to do it again. The rust really is not a factor in reliabillity. It also has the 3.0 v6 and never had a head gasket problem with 120K miles on it.