Toyota TACOMA vs Ford RANGER - VI

2456713

Comments

  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    Go to www.carpoint.msn.com and see reliability data. Also compare older Fords against Toyota's you may be surprised.
    As far as a TRD "competing against a Ford RAnger". I did that already in the Cascade Mountains of Oregon. My friend told me he was goint to "eat me alive". Well he didn't. I went everywhere he went, climbed, trailed, crossed whatever. Granted, I have P256x75R16 all terrain tires on my Ranger, giving it more ground clearance and better tracking ability than the stock firejunkers.
    TRD in my opinion is a marketing gimmick. The locker can only be engaged in 4low and at speeds of less than 5mph. Without the locker engaged the axle is open. A very expensive option that will only be used maybe 2% of your driving time.
  • rickc5rickc5 Member Posts: 378
    How about .2% of driving time? Or even .02%? Two percent would mean you would use it AT LEAST 6 days a year. Highly doubtful unless you did LOTS of radical off-roading.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    I have a hard time with your story Vince. I think that the Ranger is a great truck but try driving a TRD Tacoma instead of just trying to keep up with it. You may well be able to keep up with the TRD in your Ranger but not with the comfort and complete control that the TRD offers. I have both the Ford and a Toyota so I know what I'm talking about!! You keep repeating that the TRD package is a gimmick because you've never driven one off- road. In case you give me a bunch of hogwash that you have driven a TRD Tacoma please just save it because you wouldn't be saying what you are if you have. Ford may offer something comparable in a Ranger in the future but for now it's inferior to the TRD.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    allknowing, my point is:
    The TRD is supposed to be vastly superior to ANY Ranger. The TRD is supposed to bury any Ranger anytime, anywhere, anyday. This was the thought of my friend too. He and I exchange jabs all the time about our trucks. Finally one day I said "Prove it". He was glad too, telling me he was going to leave me in the dust, the Ford is going to breakdown, ect... The ball was in his court to show me, take me, whatever to places the Ranger could not go and his TRD could go. My whole point is do you really need to spend the extra 3K for a setup that you may use 2% of your driving time? even less for the locker?. He tried and tried to go places he thought for sure the Ranger would get stuck in or would not be able to climb. Surprise! I went everywhere, climbed, trailed, crossed whatever he did in his TRD. OK, maybe I was tossed around a bit more, or my ride was a bit more bumpy than his, or maybe my tires slipped a bit more than his at times, but I made it.
    Statisics show that most 4x4's don't even see gravel roads.
  • mmcbride1mmcbride1 Member Posts: 861
    Just so you know, I too am open to other makes than Toyota. Last week, my wife and I went to the local Ford dealer to look at Explorers (we have my truck for the offroading, so for her a 4WD minivan fits the bill just fine). Anyway, the Explorers cost just as much as 4Runners do now! A nicely equipped XLT with the SOHC is about $33,000, same as a comparable SR5 4Runner. Eddie Bauer/Limited Explorers were in the $37-38k range, about the same as a 4Runner Limited.

    When we looked into leasing, even with the 4.75% offered by Ford and getting the truck at 3% over invoice, the lease payments would have been higher than my 4Runner's because the Ford residual was only 57% vs. my 62%! (see, resale DOES matter) I was willing to get a Ford if it was cheaper than a Toyota, but for the same price, it won't be a Ford. There goes that argument.

    BTW, drove a 2001 Pathfinder LE as well. Toyota, Ford and all the others better look out. That is one nice truck with plenty of power and the LE (top of the line) only stickered at about $33-34k vs. $37-40k for Toyota/Ford top of the line models.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    I see what you're saying Vince and I, in no way, will bash the Ranger because it's a damn good truck. Anyone thinking that the Ranger is limited in off road ability is probably stretching the truth a bit in most cases. However, I don't fully agree that you will see the benefits of the TRD only 2% of the time because I think the package also improves the road feel. I'll concede that that's my preference as I like a stiffer more sports car like feel. The Ranger has a softer ride and I know some may prefer that. Personally, I have no problem paying an extra $3000 for the TRD Tacoma because I think it's more fun to drive with the stiffer suspension and improved handling, bigger stock tires, and overall looks that are pleasing to me. I've had no problem paying $10,000 more for a sports car in the past for the same reasons. The more level headed out there may not see things as I do and save their hard earned money.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    One thing I do agree on are the tires that Ford puts on the Rangers are a joke! The tires scream, "Save money, make profits!". Toyota puts on great tires right from the gitgo. Tires make a huge difference on how a truck is going to handle and perform.
    And, I have to say, I am glad the 4.0 SOHC is coming soon, This was needed a year ago by book, The Ranger was getting clobbered in the HP war.
    This room seems to have quieted down over the last 2-3 weeks. Hind, wsn, even spoog aren't around as much. CP has also vanished. It was fun debating the Tacoma vs Ranger. I need to spend more time in the Frontier vs Ranger room. Lots of fun over there now. I need to start digging up more stuff on the Frontier.
    See you in the hills.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    just working my buns off redoing 2 bathrooms before carpet is delivered on 5/15.

    Http://www.fordranger.com/4l/6845.html

    This link is from Gloria over on the Ranger Station. She is in a repair shop business and does rock climbing in Nevada in 4X4 Fords, Explorer I think. She VALUES the 4.0 and in this link states that the 4 liter, properly maintained, should get in excess of 200,000 miles between rebuilds. She also has published more than one article in 4X4 magazines such a "Four Wheeler". I would trust her judgement.

    So if you THINK the Ford 4.0 is a bad engine, THINK AGAIN.
  • barlitzbarlitz Member Posts: 752
    The big games tonight, I think its the same lottery her in Mass I gotta get me some tickets,btw spoog is still around he's bothering everyone in the F150 vs Tundra topic now, maybe now he's got a trd tundra,I've got a superchip in my F250 Huge differance in performance especially in tranny shifting and acceleration, But I hate writing that check every month have been thinking about another Ranger anyone know when new engine will be available?
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    I've heard really good things about the Superchip. I don't particularly care for the shift programming in my 5-speed auto, so I guess I'll chip it and see what happens.

    I believe the Ranger is slated to receive the SOHC 4L sometime this summer or early fall.

    You could probably get an incredible deal on a 2000 OHV 4L this fall when the new Ranger comes out. The OHV 4L is still a good engine (with an easy $500 in mods it'll perform as well as or better than the SOHC 4L in stock form), but everyone will want the Cammer. I'm thinking great financing and/or huge cash back on the 'ole push-rod Rangers. Might be something to think about...
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    "I need to start digging up more stuff
    on the Frontier.
    See you in the hills."



    Come on Vince. What have you ever "dug up" about that Tacoma? lol. Surely your trademark slogans of " Enjoy the Sticker", and " Ford must be doing something right if they sell the most trucks" are merely arms length away.
  • rangerknowhowrangerknowhow Member Posts: 25
    ive heard the new ranger WILL have the 4.0L SOHC with 205hp. Is this For sure? If so...when will this happen and where can i find out more info? I called Ford Motor Co. and they said they dont know anything about next years Ranger. A dealer told me they are also planning a Crew Cab to Compete with Dodge, Cheverolet, and Nissan. and info will help.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    Spoog:
    In one of your posts you stated you agreed with someone who said a stock Ranger cannot compete with a TRD.

    Would you settle for pictures of stock Rangers competing with Jeeps (not ONE TRD to be seen) on some of the worst trails in MOAB?

    Some people I write to from the Denver area made that trip on April 21. I was going to go but still had not finished my house project. When I post the URL, follow the antics of fordtech and 410ford as they compete real well with the Jeeps and conquer "hells revenge".
    http://www.fordranger.com/offroad/42634.html
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    Spoog:
    In one of your posts you stated you agreed with someone who said a stock Ranger cannot compete with a TRD.

    Would you settle for pictures of stock Ranges competing with Jeeps (not ONE TRD to be seen) on some of the worst trails in MOAB?

    Some people I write to from the Denver area made that trip on April 21. I was going to go but still had not finished my house project. When I post the URL, follow the antics of fordtech and 410ford as they compete real well with the Jeeps and conquer "hells revenge".
    http://www.fordranger.com/offroad/42634.html
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    Ever been on a 4+ rated trail in your TRD?

    Do they even HAVE 4+ rated trails in Ill.?

    Do not doubt what a Ranger can do, as it WILL suprise you.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    it was skitz from Sandy Utah and fordtech from Golden Colorado that made the MOAB run, not 410ford. Both are members of Rough Ranges Off-Road club.
  • barlitzbarlitz Member Posts: 752
    Go to blueovalnews.com and check into that site you'll be able to find out any info on new trucks and cars coming up in the next few years.The new ranger will also have a new tranny also read there ford will have a v6 deisel available for the f series pickups in 2003.
  • xena1axena1a Member Posts: 286
    Checkout this link for more info on the 2001 Ranger with the SOHC 4.0L:

    www.blueovalnews.com/ranger_edge.htm
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    As usual, your link falls flat on it's face. Where are the pics? Where is the info?

    That proves nothing. For all we know, those guys just parked their rigs at the start of the trail and hopped into another ride.


    And I will say this AGAIn Cspounser... a TRD TAcoma will TROUNCE a Ranger. Absolutely TROUNCE it. The TRD TAcoma is the best stock pickup made for offroading, PERIOD.

    Do I reaLLY need to repost the Tacoma verse ranger comparison by 4wheeelr again?
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    http://www.fourwheeler.com/newtrucks/ptoty/98/ptoty.html


    Although the compact Tacoma XtraCab itself is not completely new, the Toyota Racing Development (TRD) suspension and locking rear differential package is. The TRD Off-Road Package offers oversized fender flares, alloy wheels, 31-inch tires, Bilstein shocks, slightly softer spring rates, and an electromechanical, button-actuated rear locking differential, all for $1,690.

    Our Surfside Green test unit came with the 3.4-liter, dual-overhead cam, 24-valve engine and five-speed manual transmission. The Tacoma came factory-equipped with the lowest axle gears of the test: 4.10:1. It was this combination of excellent gearing (First gear for the factory five-speed is 3.83:1) that made testers comment about how readily the Tacoma jumped off the line. In fact, during track testing, the Tacoma was substantially faster than the others, both loaded and unloaded (see page 30). Tract ion came courtesy of a more aggressive tread in the 31x10.50 Goodyear Wrangler three-stage GSA. We found it supplied surprisingly good cornering power on pavement, with plenty of potential for aired-down trail running.
    As well as the Tacoma performed on the track, it was on the trail where the premium import seemed most comfortable. Best-in-class ground clearance, the most aggressive tread of the bunch, and a crawl ratio of better than 40:1 made the Tacoma everyone' s choice for hill climbs and steep backside descents. Even our resident auto-tranny diehards had to admit that the lively throttle response, sure-grip clutch, and built-to-work gearing meshed together as well as any championship-caliber team. In each perf ormance-related category of our test, the Toyota won.




    It's not often that our collection of testers agree on anything (in fact, never), but this year's Pickup Truck of the Year was a unanimous decision. Praises relating to the TRD suspension mentioned its ability to control rutted, seriously choppy terra in better than any other vehicle we'd driven. One tester went so far as to note that during a few moments of an effortless dry-wash run, it seemed the spirit of Ivan Stewart had taken over his body. This is a truck that can go slow or go fast, on pavement or off.

    Ultimately, in addition to a strong engine, good tires, and supremely tuned suspension, the clutch defeat switch (the only one in a truck sold in the US.), lever-operated transfer case, and pushbutton locking rear differential were the icing on a toug h-truck cake. Although you have to pay a premium for a premium package, the TRD Tacoma, dollar for dollar, is the best on- and off-highway compact package (maybe of any truck) we've seen. This truck has features the others just don't offer, and they all w ork. And that's why it's our 1998 Pickup Truck of the Year.





    Maybe ONE of these days it will fially sink into your skull.....sigh........
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    http://www.fourwheeler.com/newtrucks/ptoty/98/tech.html


    Ford's 4.0-liter overhead-valve V-6 gave our Regular Cab Ranger plenty of off-the-line motivation with 168 lb.-ft. of rear-wheel torque at 2500 rpm. Mazda's 3.0-liter/five-speed manual transmission gave the Regular Cab B-truck the slowest 0-60 time, but the best fuel economy of the group. Although the middle-sized V-6 of the group, the Toyota 3.4-liter DOHC 24-valve V-6 pulled all the way through the torque curve like most small-blocks.

    The Ford five-lug 8.8-inch rearend comes standard with the 4.0-lite/five-speed auto combo. Leaf springs and 3.73:1 axle gears are rated to carry 1,180 pounds. Mazda's 7.5-inch rearend is standard with the 3.0-liter V-6. Not surprisingly, our ride-quality vastly improved with 12 bags of landscape rock in the compact's bed.
    Toyota's TRD Tacoma comes with the only factory offered rear locking differential on any (full-size or compact) pickup. We found it a huge asset for trail adventures.
    FORD & MAZDA TOYOTA

    Ford's new compact frontend uses F-150-style short- and long-arm IFS, with torsion bars. The setup offers big gains on pavement--but not without trail sacrifices.

    The new Pulse-Vacuum Hub (PVH) used exclusively on compact Fords and Mazdas allows for true in-cab-controlled shift-on-the-fly capability.

    Toyota's double A-arm/coilover frontend handles pavement cornering and trail flex with equal skill. We like the six-lug axles and big-caliper front discs.
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    http://www.fourwheeler.com/newtrucks/ptoty/98/ptoty1.html


    Following in the footsteps of its close relative, the '98 Ranger adopted many of the mechanical modifications incorporated into the Explorer two years earlier. Among the biggest changes include an entirely new double A-arm front suspension with light-duty torsion bars. The new IFS, combined with an all-new rack-and-pinion steering setup (which offers its own steering fluid cooler), won high praises from our testers over our 800-mile test. Specifically, the Ranger scor ed well in Highway Performance categories that centered around maneuverability and long-distance cruising. Testers noted the new steering proved especially quick to react in tight-chicane situations. No doubt about it: This new Ranger out-handles, out-ste ers and out-corners any Ranger before. By a mile.


    We would characterize the drivetrain, specifically the transmission, as biased for highway performance as well. All 4.0-liter Rangers (and Mazdas, for that matter) ordered without the manual tranny get the first five-speed automatic transmission offer ed for any pickup. Our testers split over the need and/or usefulness of a mileage-biased transmission geared for empty-load flatland running. Those in favor noted the nearly seamless transitions from one gear to the next, and how the transmission itself c ould, if the vehicle was driven right--no jackrabbit leadfoot starts--tack on another 50,000 miles of life to the engine.

    On the trail, we found the automatic transmission to be a double-edged sword. The smoothness of the First-to-Second shift, combined with the inherent low-end grunt of the engine, was almost enough to overcome the taller gearing. And in the end, voting followed individual preferences for manuals versus automatics. Two testers noted both the manual transmissions (Mazda and Toyota) felt more "in control" on the twisty low-range trails of Truckhaven, where face-down compression braking was very helpful o n steep-trail crawling. In low-range, our automatic Ranger offered a rather delicate 22.8:1 crawl ratio (First x axle gear x low-range); the Mazda and Toyota offered 34.4:1 and 40.4:1 gearing, respectively.


    Likewise, where the stiffened front suspension cleanly handled all paved-road obstacles thrown in its path, the Ford IFS had trouble keeping up with the broken terrain of dry washes, hill climbs, and washboards. Admittedly, it is a rare vehicle that c an manage all the extremes with equal aplomb, but several testers commented that the Ford liked to spring a little bit quicker (and hop higher) off the rolling whoop-de-doos. For the most part, we found the sacrificed off-highway capability to be greater than the gained on-highway performance, and for that reason it didn't score well in the parts of our test that are most heavily-weighted; however, that isn't to say testers weren't squabbling among themselves to get into the Ranger for the highway drives up the mountain.

    Finally, testers showed their traditional colors by not favoring the dash-mounted rotary dial ("looks a lot like an A/C control--and no Neutral") of the Borg-Warner 44-05 electronic transfer case. The 44-05 never gave us a lick of trouble--we submerge d the gearboxes under freezing water, as well as subjecting them to high-heat, dust-blasted wash runs--and by going to a dial, floor space opens up, but our scorers' preference is for a lever-actuated system, or anything with a Neutral position, regardles s of the floor space it takes up.

    Like any good four wheeler, we found the Ford Ranger could do several things quite well, scoring highly in On-Road Ride and Handling and Interior Comfort. To us, the new Ranger is a nice-looking, comfortable truck that is easy to drive and easy to own . And it's made in plants with a reputation for quality. But the Pickup Truck of the Year has to do it all pretty damn well, and it has to be great off-highway. And so we introduce our 1998 winner.
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    Can we say repetitive and boring. Yawn...

    Can we say repetitive and boring. Yawn...

    Can we say repetitive and boring. Yawn...

    Can we say repetitive and boring. Yawn...

    Can we say repetitive and boring. Yawn...

    You've been posting that now almost 3 year old article for the past umpteen months of a head to head article about two unsimilarly equipped trucks.

    Why don't you just give it up? It's really sounding sad. :o(
  • rangerknowhowrangerknowhow Member Posts: 25
    thanks for the help on the future Ranger...i was gonna buy a 2000 4.0 ext. cab but decided on waiting for the "edge" does anybody know when it should go into production.
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    Well pal, those are basically the same ranger and tacoma models available now. The only thing that has changed is a bit of cosemtic surgery.

    Im sorry if you cant handle the facts.
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    Still relying on someone's opinion as fact, huh?

    Having trouble forming your own opinions?

    Did you figure out what torque means yet?

    Sounding even sadder.... :o(
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    I'd assume the 2001 Rangers to be available starting sometime this summer. At the very least Ford should have them on the showroom floors this fall. I'm looking forward to a test drive myself.
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    YOu have a real problem bud. I would hardly call real hard DATA "someones" opinion.

    The Tacoma beat the Ranger in every performance related category. Sorry pal, you cant dispute that. And if you TRY, you are only uselessly playing devils advocate and arguing for the sake of argument.

    PLease get your head out of your [non-permissible content removed]. thanks.
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    You might try taking your head out of your [non-permissible content removed] to look up torque in the dictionary. :^O

    Now you're changing your argument to 0-60 times and such?

    I'm sorry. I actually use my brain to think for myself and form my own opinions rather than let some car rag comparo do it for me.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    Speaking of boring, you guys bring up the same stuff too. Why don't you guys try driving a TRD Tacoma and then maybe your opinion will have some backing. The Ranger is a great truck but if you drive both, particularly off road, pick the Ranger as the most capable. I liked the Ford very much but when I drove the Toyota it was even better.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    a typo- I meant to say "you won't pick the Ranger as the most capable".
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    all...:
    I have driven a TRD so therefore, by your definition, my opinion has backing? I never said the TRD was a bad truck either. It is a great truck, 3-5K$ higher in price than my Ranger, but still a great truck.
    My point, since you did not follow, was that the Ranger, despite the lack of:
    1) a3-5K$ higher price,
    2) a trick suspension,
    3) not requiring you to get a high priced option to get a tach,
    4) 31X10.5 tires standard (psst, you can buy all the 31 inch tires you want at Discount tire),
    5) a bit less hp (at the sacrifice of torque, the factor that really does an engines work)
    and
    6) a spiffy TRD Toyota ad sticker

    a Ranger does very well for itself off-road.

    spoog:
    Well I can understand, knowing you, how you "could" think pics were at that URL. It was intended to just introduce the trip those guys took. Pics to follow, I ASSURE you YOU, even maybe by email, will be the first to know when they are available.

    Oh, you said once you took a Toyota over Engineers pass?

    That is rated 3-3.5. As stated, and I will find my URL at work, Devils Revenge in Moab is rated:

    4+.

    So we establish Rangers have been where you dare not take your Toyota, correct?
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    I have never before brought up that a couple of Rangers traversed some 4+ rated trails in Moab.

    So why the comment in post 81?

    I try, rather than some people on this board, to identify new info on BOTH Ranger and Tacoma. I have cited perhaps 5-6 articles, some in Four Wheeler, on the Ranger and Mazda tests (the ones from Four Wheeler, with the excepion of the one article spoog cites over and over and over again have been
    very favorable
    to the Ranger.

    So please get your story straight ok?
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    No one is going to accept some link of a bunch of meatheads yapping.

    Once again you confuse the issue.

    You know, an Octopus does an interesting thing.

    Whenever it is frightened, or surprised, or confused, it shoots a big stream of jet black ink into the water then scurries away. This cloud of ink confuses and clouds the scene.


    You are the Octopus of this forum.
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    I would love to go out and drive the best off-road truck that each Co. has to offer out on the trails somewhere.

    But, there are a couple of things holding me back:

    (1) I don't think a dealer would like it too much for me to ring out a brand new truck on the trails, as I'm not quite fanatical enough to go out and buy them.

    (2) There's nothing off-road to speak of here in Illinois. The most off-road you can get would be a corn field.



    So, I'm stuck.


    I only take offense to someone posting a magazine comparo as fact. The results beyond technical data are the opinions of the writers.

    My beef with spooge's article is that they compare dissimilar trucks (most likely due to what the manufacturer had available for press evaluations). BTW, I'm not saying, either, that I wouldn't come to the same conclusion the testers did should I have been out there too.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    Spoog is back! Back with the TRD he wishes he owned, the man who uses his ground clearance to go OVER objects rather than use his tires to crawl over them!! LOL.
    These comparisons are old, bias and full of inconsistancies. We have picked these apart like mad in past posts and rooms. I also notice he fails once again to mention price, and crashtest results, and when the this fantastic locker is going to be used. Anyone who knows when and how a locker is used knows that this very expensive option may be used at most 2% of your total driving time. The axle is open the rest of the time. Everytime I see a TRD Tacoma I have to laugh. I have to give Toyota kudos for one heck of a marketing gimmick though. Enjoy the stickers guys!
  • barlitzbarlitz Member Posts: 752
    I checked out a Ranger today that had a nice 4x4 xlt flareside extendacab for $17701. it had the 3.0 and a 5 speed not a bad price.I'm gonna wait and take a look at the new Ranger when they come out.I did also check out the Sporttrac an xlt 4x4 was about $26000.Nice truck they'll sell much better looking than the Nissan.
    Spoog every time I check out this site you ranting and raving about your tacoma you're even over in the F150 vs Tundra site raving about the Tundra's.I don't think you own any truck but maybe a bicycle with training wheels.Why don't you back up your claims and take a snap shot of your truck take it to fotomat for $5 bucks they'll put it on a floppy disk and you can transfer it onto your computer.I'd really like to see this infamous supercharged trd you have.
  • eagle63eagle63 Member Posts: 599
    hey spoog, I'm curious to know what a TRD has that a ZR2 doesn't have when it comes to specific off-road equipment. thanks, eagle63.
  • rangerknowhowrangerknowhow Member Posts: 25
    they Toyota probably is better in the mud or sno orsand than a ranger...But it was built for than. On the street or highway it doesnt compare. Also it depends the driver to where a 4x4 can go. Maybe the Toyota can get there faster than the Ranger(in the mud or snow or sand) but when it really matters, when you HAVE to get somewhere, the ranger will get you anywhere you need to go. It may not be smooth off-road,or entergetic...but it will go anywhere the toyota can. Plus itsmore comfortable, cheeper,and alotbetter looking tht the heartbeat of Japan. Just ask anyone.
  • rangerknowhowrangerknowhow Member Posts: 25
    for the misspelling
  • scottssssscottssss Member Posts: 147
    From Spoogs favorite article..

    Ranger price as tested 21,475

    Tacoma price as tested 26,205

    almost $5000....
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    cpousnr - I made the comment because you guys feel the need to try to prove that the Ranger can go anywhere a TRD Tacoma can go over and over again. Yes it can but it doen't do it with the same control and comfort which you know if you've really driven a TRD. It's more expensize yes but it's definitely a more capable truck. Just as a Camaro will achieve the same speed on the HWY as a Porsche, the Porsche just does it with better control and comfort and is to some, well worth the extra money.

    rangerknowhow - How does the TRD not compare on the road to a Ranger? I'll grant you that the Ranger has a softer ride but The TRD can take corners faster , and without the body lean that a Ranger has. As far as looks, I rarely had anyone complement me on the looks of my Ford but I get regular complements on my Toyota. In my experience, the general public prefers the looks of the TRD Tacoma. Where you live maybe its different. In Russia, for example, people prefer the Yugo.

    eagle63 - I don't know that the TRD has anything that the ZR2 has except a reputation for better reliability than the S-10 and a better review from Edmunds as well as every other truck review I've read.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    I don't mean to appear to be knocking the Ranger. Once again I like both the Ford and the Toyota and the Ranger is a good truck. The TRD is just a more refined vehicle but you do have to pay bigger dollars for it. The only area that the Ranger appears to rate over the Toyota is in side collisions. We've debated that to death in the past, and I think the 4x4 would rate higher than the std. which was tested, but the Ford would probably still do better in that area. In front collisions they're about the same. When it comes to drivability though, the Toyota excels and anyone driving both will see that. Rather than trying to knock the TRD all the time, accept that the Ranger is a good truck for the money and hope that Ford offers a package similar to the TRD someday.

    Vince- Your locker ritual response is getting old too. In places that my Ford's limited slip kicked in, my other truck (the TRD Toyota), pulled right through. The better suspension and tires did the trick without the locker. Once again, try driving a TRD sometime rather than just trying to knock it all the time.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    Where did spoog miss the part of my posts that I was going to GO WITH those guys to Moab? To the point, I will say that I had reservations in Grand Junction for the night of the 20th.

    It is not just idle chatter of a couple of guys.

    So we will leave Moab to the Jeeps and Rangers for at least that day. And spoog to the cow pastures of Ill. and Wis. and racing Rangers from red lights to impress, well I guess,

    himself.

    Octopus. Good comeback from a clown fish. . .
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    It is not a case of TRYING to prove a Ranger goes where the TRD goes.

    I have DONE it numerious times and posted my pictures to prove that. Check my posts in the past. Unlike some, I try not to repost the same thing over and over.

    We are in agreement that the TRD extra expense is offset by the additional work that went into the engineering of the added systems. I, unlike others, have not implied it was not worth it. I have tried to stress the alternative of a Ranger. I also have suggested that Ford offer something like a TRD and they may in the Adrenalin off-road package.

    Less money, good reliability, good ride and it will preform very well off roas. Speed in getting there in favor of the TRD? Well, your only as fast as that slow polk Ranger in front of you on a narrow trail. . .
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    Ok. I'll buy that.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    My whole point with the TRD package is, How much will you really use it?? I have a friend who has a TRD as you all know. He rarely uses it!! I have driven it too. I am going to ask him how many times in the past 3 years has he engaged the locker. The locker is limited in its use in 4low along with terrain, along with speed. I am not knocking the TRD, the suspension is well done. But for the normal user the Ranger will take you where you want to go for a whold lot less $$$$. The Ranger may bounce a bit more, or a tire may slip a bit more, but the Ranger will get you there.
    By the way, I own a Ranger XLT 4x4 stepside in light blue. I get complements all the time on my truck.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    I use the TRD every time I drive it because, to me, it's a lot more fun to drive than the Ranger. The Ranger does its job and drives nicely, but the TRD Tacoma is a blast every time I get in it.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    By the way, I don't have a stepside Ranger. They are pretty nice looking.
  • rangerknowhowrangerknowhow Member Posts: 25
    the Ranger has been proven to handle better than the Tacoma on road..wait... the article i read was stressing the good features of the ranger versus the tacoma in 4x2 models..since this is a 4x4 site i will be fair and not start arguing about it. But i will confess the tacoma 4x4 is a smart looking truck...but the Ranger is Better looking in all cat's. Many have told me about the great looking rangers from all over the country online so i know they are preferred all over not just in my town. Where i live you will never see a toyota because there are no places to use the expensive TRD. By the way. Lets look forward to next years TRD whoopin'"EDGE"
This discussion has been closed.

Your Privacy

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.