War of the Compacts: Frontier, Ranger, Tacoma, S10, Dakota, B-Series, & Hombre

cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
Alright, I've gone ahead and created a new topic
for all of us compact owners to wage a war over
who's truck is best.

My vote goes to the Mazda B-Series for best all
around compact truck. I think it's the best
looking of the bunch. The '01 B-Series will have
tons of power with the Cammer 4L. It's priced like
a steal. And, it's got a pretty good warranty.

Any commments?

(I'm sure this one will get the pot stirred)


  • theurinaltheurinal Member Posts: 11
    Mazda? Never see them. If they are worth anything, why don't they sell?
  • vmanvman Member Posts: 103
    I, for one, don't believe the Dakota fits into the compact class, unless you're talking about a regular cab 4cyl. Even then, I'm not so sure.

    Personally, I think the Dakota is the best looking body style, and no, it's not just because I own one.

    For the record, the best truck I've had to date was an '89 Mazda (when Mazda still made them). Are the new ones still re-badged Fords?

    For my own curiousity, do you really think there is a "best" truck? If so, what is the point of trying to discern it? I think the "best" car is a Ferrari 550 Maranello, but I won't be owning one those any day soon!

    I think "best" is largely objective, and can only be concluded after many years/miles of good service, not a two week test drive by an automotive magazine. I also believe that any of the vehicles listed could potentially make the grade based on such criteria.

    Ultimately, I think the "best" truck is the one that fits your individual needs, tastes, and finances.
  • goobagooba Member Posts: 391
    cthompson21,good idea and good volley.I guess it had to start somewhere.
    You do realize that the Sporttrac guys may feel left out and guys will cry foul over the Dakota.
    This board should get real interesting.I am looking forward to it.let the fun begin.
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    Good question. They're a Ford Ranger clone with no advertising budget. They look like a cross between the current Ranger and Tacoma.

    I guess people think a ford blue oval is better than a silver mazda badge and are willing to pay a premium.

    The Mazdas are cheaper than the Rangers too (by a few hundred comparatively equipped) and have a better warranty (3yr/50K vs. 3yr/36K).

    Ever hear of a Mazda Navajo? They were an Explorer clone from a few years back. Same kind of story.

    Another thing I've observed is that many car buyers don't even know the Ranger and Mazda are twins with a bit of different sheet metal. It seems that in today's world that people want a name more than a vehicle (just look at BMW).

    Oh, there's the dealership thing too. B-Series is the only Mazda truck available. And, there's only a fraction of Mazda dealers compared to Ford dealers. Plus, there's still some old-school "buy american" guys out there too.
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    vman, good points. I don't personally feel a Dakota is a compact, but that's where they group it.

    While there is definately not a "best truck" for everyone. IMHO, the Mazda just fits the bill for the highest % of truck buyers. But, as we all know, personal tastes, preferences, biases, prior experiences (bad or good), etc... make more of an impact than the person's needs.

    gooba, i forgot about the S-T. I guess I look at it as an Explorer with wet storage. Besides, Ford is building a Super-Cab Ranger for '02(?).

    The V8 is a helluva lot to bring to the table in this group (if you consider it compact). Quality issues and an astronomical price when goodies are added really steered me away from it back when I bought my current truck.
  • astaasta Member Posts: 122
    "best truck" is really a tough call, because it's so hard to rate trucks for performance, unlike streetrods. I would definitely take issue with the comment that people buy cars just for the badging, hence all those BMW's sold! If you've ever driven a Beamer you would know it's one of the most marvelously engineered vehicles in the world - tough, fast, incredibly safe, and the best ergonomics I've ever seen, save for Audi perhaps. But, I digress - as to the new "truck war topic", I'd have to go with the Dakota simply because it's the only "compact" that offers a V8, hence more power, more performance etc. For handling, I'd probably take the Toyota (and for best full truck I'd take the Tundra because of its superb engine and quality build). For design you gotta go with the Dakota - it's the only compact with any character whatsoever because of the grill. The real war should be: what is the best true 4 door pickup out there. Now that one should get a wide array of posts!
  • mahimahimahimahi Member Posts: 497
    Ok I like the topic!
    What I want to know is, since this topic has the word 'war' in the title, would you the author of the topic mind if I use this topic to 'battle or debate' someone that I feel has challenged me on something on another topic to keep it from getting ugly there bring them here? Like the 'war' I am in with Vince8? Instead of glogging or inturrupting the current subject on that topic, switch our battle to this topic? I don't know if you followed his remarks to me on the Tacoma vs. Ranger topic? But I took our discussion to the Ranger vs Frontier topic as per his request. This might keep the other topics civil. When one comes to this topic they might expect a warto be going on! :)

    However if I into a 'heated' debate with someone here it doesn't mean that I will carry that composure onto another topic we might be on. For example, I get into a crazy battle with you on the Mazda blah, blah, blah....When we are on the Ranger v. Frontier site we can be civil and not carry the 'battle' to that topic. What do you think?
  • mahimahimahimahi Member Posts: 497
    I know this is going to sound stupid but I was thinking about the names of these trucks: Ranger, Hombre, Frontier, Tacoma, Sonoma. If you breakdown what the names of these trucks:

    RANGER= on the range, flat open areas. The dictionary defines it as "one of a body of armed guards who patrola region.

    HOMBRE= man or fellow???? (How does this translate to pickup truck? And whats with the Japanese company obession with Spanish names anyway?)

    FRONTIER= heheheh...this one's the best! from the dictionary "the limit of knowledge or the advanced achievement in a particular field" Is Nissan Saying this is the 'best' they can do? Or is this the extent of their knowledge!

    TACOMA= Northwestern city...relation to truck, how??????

    SONOMA= Moutain range just north of S.F., Calif. A bad name with good meaning, sounds like a wine or a three-door hatchback.

    I personally like the numbers better: B4000, S-10/15, SR5, FJ-40, CJ's and so on.
  • modvptnlmodvptnl Member Posts: 1,352
    Even though I like Fords they seem to be lame when it comes to new names. Both Ranger and Explorer were trim levels for the F-series trucks way back when. Who could forget Mustang II, Bronco II or LTD II? Could a F-250 Powerstroke XLT Lariat Super Duty II be far off?

    The best compact truck? From reading this crap for months(year?) I will say with bias that even though you may have more of a chance of getting a bad Ranger then a Toy or Nissan after you factor in rebates/interest incentives, purchase price and freedom of choice the Ranger is the best value. The thousand or 3 difference between a Ranger and Tacoma can be used, if you wish, to tailor the Ranger to almost anything you want. On a personal note I will never keep a vehicle the couple hundred thousand miles that Toy owners brag about. So as said above it is a personal choice.
  • qc2001qc2001 Member Posts: 30
    i also agree that when i compare my 89 s10 to my new QC that should arrive this week, it is hard to make the comparison. i just know that the size of the dakota and the availability of a strong v8(4.7) that is not a 5.0 gas guzzler that sold me. i have driven cars and trucks from all of the big three, and find that they all have their own little quirks. an as far as toyota's ruling the 200,000 mile mark, our company has a 88 dakota, 4 banger, 5 spd,reg cab, sb, 4x2 with just over 200k and it still runs like a top eventhough i personally have pounded this truck for the last 50k. i am talking about 45 to 50 mph in second gear, and speed shifting it as well as you can. we finially retired it 2 months ago if anybody wants it?

  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    But just look at the majority of BMW owners out there. You can tell with a quick glance that they're not enthusiasts and have bought the BMW for status, not for its superb handling & wonderful drivetrain. A super easy way of discerning this is just taking a look at the tranny, auto or manual.

    BTW, in the next year or two, every manufacturer will have a true 4dr pickup. I think the Taco and S10/Hombre get theirs in '01 and the Ranger/Mazda twins get theirs in '02. While I like ext-cabs, I think the quad-cabs, etc... are too much of a sacrifice when it comes to bed space and looks (the Nissan CC is the only one that I think even looks good with 4 doors).
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    Well, I'm not the moderator. I guess you guys can do whatever you want as long as you don't pi$$ off Meredith. :o)

    Auto manufacturers really seem to like using names from the west and the mountains to conjure up some image of ruggedness and off-road ability. It seems kind of lame to me. I prefer the way German cars are named: line, engine displacement, and trim. You get a whole bunch of info in just the name (the B-Series truck kind of do this too).
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    Are you sure that Dodge and GM don't lump their 3/4 and 1 ton pickups in their sales figures too? Historically, they've just been the same truck with more suspension.

    I think it's less of a stretch than lumping all Honda Accords together. They've got wagons, sedans, coupes, the Del Sol,and the SI. Well, some might not be sold now, but to me they had at least 5 different cars being sold under the Accord name. What's the logic in that (besides being able to tout best selling car in the US)?
  • jauto98jauto98 Member Posts: 77
    Hello all... I just like to put in my opinions and experience in owning a compact. I currently own a 1997 GMC Sonoma reg cab with the 2.2 L inline 4 with automatic. As of right now, i really like my Sonoma and would buy another sonoma if i had to buy a compact truck. This is my first truck and it has been a really change from driving compact cars and all. The reason i was in the market for my first truck was because i needed to haul stuff to various places and since i had some pretty good experiences with GM products i decided to get the Sonoma because IMO, it looks better than the chevy s-series and isuzu hombre clones with its uncluttered grille and its monochromatic paint look. Sure, getting a ranger/b-series have come to mind, but i think these trucks are pretty small. I'm 5'5 and i still think the ranger/b-series are pretty small. As for the drivetrain, if you need a truck to actually haul some stuff and not for a daily commuter, invest in the V6 or larger engine. I think 4 cylinders should be banned in all trucks because of the lack of power and the need to work the engine to actually get some power. And using the AC doesn't really help, as living in the south requires the use of cold air continuously. Besides the engine, the tires on my sonoma are pretty crappy, which are tiger paws. if you haven't heard, they have no traction what so ever, in all conditions. Other than that, my sonoma has been really reliable.

    Sorry for being so long... anyway, i think i should stop for now.... haha.. l8r
  • mahimahimahimahi Member Posts: 497
    I don't see why you guys can't compare your dodges in here, but to what? Your quad cab is bigger than my Nissan CC and offers more power, in fact the only debatable thing might be resale value and reliablity.

    As for Ford's numbers, we've been over this in other topics, but they(Ford) includes all of their sales- rental car companies, gov't agencies and fleet sales just to name a few. Sales figures aren't accurate from any company, because what we see has been through the marketing departmant. So I don't pay much attention to sales figures mentioned in magazines.
  • astaasta Member Posts: 122
    yeah, there sure are a heckuva lot F-150's on the road, which I've never really gotten anyway - I mean it's just a truck. Doesn't have the styling or even the guts of the Ram series, doesn't seem particularly more rugged than the Chevys, less nimble than the Tundra etc. But, it is a Ford, so draw your own conclusions! cthompson21 - is Toyota going to offer a true 4-door on the Tundra and if so are they going to shorten the bed???? Very curious on that one. Understand what you mean about going with a shorty bed - most drivers who opt for that are probably not in construction or heavy hauling on a daily basis, I would guess. more like a tough family car that you can beat up on playtime for weekends in the mountains or the mud. I don't get the whole cap on cab thing. Why have a pickup if you're not going to use the vertical and lateral hauling ability? Why not just buy a Durango or Expedition or whatever? Cap owners will disagree I know. Reasons why....
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    The Dakota can be compared to the Tundra in size. Both are mid-size trucks. If I had to choose between the two I would pick the Toy.

    Tacoma and Ranger would be a toss up in the compact truck choice.
  • mahimahimahimahi Member Posts: 497
    I'm not really sure what the facination is over the Ranger. I've always thought of the Ranger as haveing the weakest of all compact truck engines including or maybe tying with the 4-cyl Isuzu. Th e close friends of mine and roomates that have had them didn't really care for them...all of them could afford the toyos or nissans at the time. Now granted I know that these trucks I'm talking about were all pre-'93 models, but until the '01 models they still weren't all that powerful. Of course, it's not all power that we look for in a truck it's a great combination of things I realize...of all of the Rangers that I have ridden in they just really impress me as a truck. They feel like it's got a soft-cushion type ride like a jacked up escort...I don't know I've never cared for the Ranger. I will have to say that the Ranger of late is kind of appealing in and out. I personally hate of Ford's cheap interiors pre'93 anything(truck wise). What the hell is up with the color-coded up/down unlock/lock switches anyway? I hope that dumbass got fired! I would be insulted if I was an owner, I'd be like I can tell which way is up or down!

    Well I was just curious because I didn't see a big price difference this year but, then again I didn't seriously shop the Ranger.
  • modvptnlmodvptnl Member Posts: 1,352
    Geeez Marty, if we're gonna' bring up 8 year old plus vehicles I guess them Toys never rusted to the point where the beds were missing, they never blew head gaskets either, the solid front axle vehicles never bent axles when off roaded hard. They were/are, after all, perfect.
  • mahimahimahimahi Member Posts: 497
    LOL... I agree with you the entire line of toyotas not just the trucks in the 80's had the biggest joke of a paint job I've ever seen. When I was detailing cars back then we had to be extremely careful with the high-speed buffer(more so than any other brand)otherwise you could easily burn the paint on a Toyota very, very thin. And your right on my '81 Toyota P/U the damn tailgate was plagued on all the corners with rust under the paint, as was the section just past the rear wheel (lower rocker panel)on the bed. But I don't know anything about the axle bending, I never had any problems with mine.

    I will say this though, the Toyota by far out 'styles' the Ranger any model year...hands down...in fact to me Toyota has the best looking compact truck than anyone.

    But my original post wasn't so much about what problems that the Ranger has had but rather why someone would choose one? I'm asking that question I guess because I just don't see anything appealing about the Ranger at all. I can see why someone could choose a Toyota or S-10 or even a Nissan because I've owned those but the Ranger is at the bottom of the list in fact it doesn't even make my list. I'm not trying to say anything is wrong at all with shoosing one I want to know what you guys see in them, This is not leading to a critical arguement, just curiosity.
  • xena1axena1a Member Posts: 286
    Cthompson - Thanks for creating this topic...

    In a way, I feel a bit guilty. But it is time to confess. Good for the soul, you know. Until recently, I owned a '99 Mazda B3000 4WD ex-cab 4 door 5-speed. Nice looking truck, decent interior, capable off-road. However, during the 13 months that I had it, the truck had 2 major fatal flaws. During road trips in particular, it became apparent that it was both underpowered and noisy. I was holding out hope that the 2001 Ranger/Mazda with its 4.0L SOHC and promise of a quieter interior would solve what I considered to be big problems with the current versions. Then, just out of curiosity, I test drove a Dakota. Momma Mia!!! There is something extremely seductive about a V8 with a 5-speed. Smooth, powerful, roomy, quiet, and comfortable, the Dakota was in my blood. It beckoned to me. I had to have it. I started looking around and was able to find a 2000 Dakota Reg Cab 4X4 4.7L 5-speed for Invoice. A decent trade in allowance on the Mazda sealed the deal. I've had it for just a week now, but I can say that it has the best combination of exterior aesthetics, power train, and ride quality of any truck I've ever owned. I would like to stress that I never had a lick of trouble with the Mazda. In fact, I drove that poor little 3.0L hard from day one without a whimper from it. It just wasn't quite the right fit for me. There, I said it. And I feel better...
  • bpeeblesbpeebles Member Posts: 4,085
    (xena1a) BINGO!! That is the allure of the Dakota. The 4.7L OHC HEMI V8 has won awards. It sounds like a Porsche (Even says Porsche owners) and is as luxurious as any car. Rack&pinion steering on a 4X4!!

    I too have 'come up the ranks' of pickups. My first was a 1981 Volkswagen Rabbit-Pickup. It was a GREAT little rig, the front-wheel-drive would take it ANYWHERE in a snowstorm and it was easy to load my snowmobile due to the very low tailgate height. I loved it... it leaked water around the windshield and rusted badly.

    My second truck was a 1991 Nissan D21 (AKA Hardbody) it ALWAYS started even on the coldest mornings but rusted WAY to fast. It now serves on the family farm and still runs like a champ. The bed has rust-holes in it.

    I now have a 2000 Dakota. I wanted a V8 but not a big truck. I also noted that older Dakotas seem to resist rust better than any other truck on the road. The Dakota was my only option and I have not regretted it.
  • goobagooba Member Posts: 391
    I thought that Dodge was not going to put their hemis in until next year and beginning with their full size.
  • thecargonzothecargonzo Member Posts: 31
    Don't feel bad about the sport track not being here. The "Ford Outfitters" are going to be lumping it's sales in with the Explorer and Explorer sport. This will keep the Explorer #1 in SUV sales. Ford always likes that PR, hates to lose it (see '96 Taurus). I sometimes kinda wish Chevy and GMC would have the same name for their
    trucks, like they used to do with the Suburban. That way if they (finally) overtake Ford in combined sales#, they could claim the #1. "nameplate"
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    Depends on how they handle this tire issue in my opinion. So far Ford is trying to cover up a deadly problem. If they don't handle this well,I doubt if I'll by another one.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    Boy it's early and my spelling sucks. S/B "buy another"
  • bookittybookitty Member Posts: 1,303
    This is a great discussion area, and the posting will prove interesting, even though "subjective" will outstrip by far, "objective." I own a Dakota 2000 Quad Cab 4X4, equipped with 4.7 V8, 5 speed manual, 3.55 LSD, SLT+ group, Tire and Handling group, skid pates, Overhead convenience group, leather wrapped wheel, engine block heater, fog lights, rear sliding window, HD service group, towing package and the following after market upgrades; A.R.E. lid and Westin side bars. This truck roughly emulates my 1995 Dakota Club Cab which I loved, and I love this truck as well. I looked at the Nissan Frontier Crew Cab and thought it to be a good looking truck that would meet my particular needs (four full front hinged doors are more meaningful to me than a larger bed as I have a great utility [5X8] trailer at my disposal). I was enamored by the solar yellow color although the list of options was not too lengthy, the SE model offered a great deal. Then, I test-drove one. The clutch and brake pedals were
    too close together to allow for my big wide feet, and the power delivered by the engine was marginal
    to say the least. My wife saw a advertisement for the Dakota, and reminded me of the admiration I had experienced with my '95. I began doing research through Edmunds, and learned much from the Dakota topics and the generous and kind Dakota owners and posters. I subsequently ordered an Amber Fire Quad Cab only to have it come in equipped incorrectly due to "sales department" error and had to re-order. The wait(s) was indeed worth it, and I am very happy with my Dakota. A club type cab would not do for me, and I didn't want to be like the guy on the TV commercial who exclaims; "Gee,I could have had a V8!" I also looked at the Ford Ranger and the Chevrolet S-10 as well as the Sport-Trac. I had a 1998 Ford Expedition (company vehicle) and was not interested in an SUV, particularly since it would involve an automatic transmission. So, this posting is more about "me" than a truck, but that is what one must expect when extracting opinions. Sorry for the lenghty post, but "You asked for it!"


    PS, I try to drive American manufactured products if possible.
  • jauto98jauto98 Member Posts: 77
    I think dodge has done a great job in creating a "compact" truck, though it seems be in line with a midsize engine. Not to big, not to small. Its the only compact to have a v8 in quad cab format and just looks awesome. Though, the dakota is a great truck, i feel that the reliablity and fuel economy are not up to par with the other products available. Hopefully, reliability will increase as time goes by and consumers have the confindence of purchasing a diamler-chrysler product. I know i would strongly consider a dakota if I had knew that it would be pretty reliable. Until then, I will probably wait and see as I will be in the market of a new truck in about 4yrs, may consider a fullsize truck such as a sierra, who knows...
  • q8740q8740 Member Posts: 12
    Anyone check out the new issue of car & Driver they review the Quad cab nissan with the Super Charger....0-60 in 9.5 sec.... what a slug and the qtr in 17.4 sec that is pathetic.

    The dakota looks like a world beater in ther comparison

    Scott Q
  • steve234steve234 Member Posts: 460
    Interesting topics. I notice the anti-fords are here in force. I have owned Ford trucks for many years and the reason why they sell is because they work. The reason why Ford is high in fleet sales is because most fleet managers are looking at reliabilty and endurance. Most of the GM products that I have dealt with have been dogs or were falling apart. Dodge should be broken down into two categories; New body style and everything before. Earlier models had a lumberwagon reputation and quality issues, but I think that they are coming up. Enough that I just bought a 01 Dakota Quad.
    I selected my vehicle because of the looks, the 4.7 engine and the four doors. I was using a F150SC as my primary vehicle and after 170K miles wanted to get a new truck, even tho the 91 is still running strong. Partly vanity and part the desire for more creature comforts. My wife and I have wanted a 4 door pickup from before the current craze and finally got one. We do a lot of hauling and feel that a v8 is essential. Our chjoices were the Dakota or the new Supercrew. We think the Supercrew is the best looking of the new F150 bodies, but did not like the height, the price and wanted something a little more parking space friendly. At a decent price we felt the Quad served our needs. Long term reliability is a factor we will decide in ten years.
    Looks play a big factor in all of our decisions, whether we admit it or not. I cannot stand the need-a-stepladder-to-get-in look that so many have. I also do not like the square Humvee look that some are trying to emulate.

    On the campershell issue, many of us need the separated storage space that a bed requires, but do not haul oversized cargo. I put a camper shell on to protect my gear from the elements and to keep thief down. I need more space than a SUV affords and do not want to worry about dirt or stinky loads. A SUV is no place for a dog that met a skunk, but it will clean out of a pickup bed.

    I am glad to see some familiar names here and am interested to see how this goes.
  • scotti81scotti81 Member Posts: 15
    Just curious are there and fellow ZR2 owners in here? Scotti
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    It's easy to see why people buy so many Rangers:

    (1) choices - customize a truck to fit your needs

    (2) price - great prices and incentives

    (3) ergonomics - best cab of any compact (somewhat subjective, but I think we can all agree that the imports have very "spartan" cabs)

    (4) engines - 3 choices from passable commuter to average performer to great hauler/tower

    (5) history - been around a long time proving itself to be a staple of the compact truck class

    (6) looks - goodlooking truck (barring '93-'97)

    (7) reliability - one of ford's best, and is reliable despite the bashing the "anti-ford's" just love to do on these boards

    (8) drivability - decent offroad performer without compromising onroad ability

    (9) mods - you can get all sorts of stuff from just about anywhere to make this truck into just about anything you want from a drag/sport truck to a mountain goat rock climber

    (10) maintenance - it is just downright cheap to maintain. it's easy for the backyard mechanic to work on, and parts are pleantiful and inexpensive

    In retrospect, how would you convince someone to choose a Frontier over a Ranger? It costs slightly more comparatively equipped (don't forget to take all of those Ford incentives into account). Its looks are downright plain (although the CC is actually pretty nice). Parts are more expensive. Its dealers are far and few between. Its strongest engine is on par in performance with the Ford mid-level 3L. Its options come prepackaged making it much less "customizeable". And, the Frontier aftermarket is tiny compared to the Ranger. I know that some of these are subjective, but I these are what come to mine when I'd be making the choice (and probably a lot of others too).
  • baditudebaditude Member Posts: 19
    Really now we cant even compare the new quads to anything else, as there is really nothing else in its class. The room in side far exceeds any import or domestic, the New 4.7 V8 is tuned like a nascar and the ride is much like a caddy. Oh did I forget the price its really affordable!
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,124
    A co-worker just bought a Dodge 4x4 Sport 4.7 V8 5spd in red. He let me drive it and man this truck [email protected]! I still question whether the Dakota and Tundra are just in a class by themselves. The interior of the Dakota is noticebly larger than a Ranger. With a V8 the Dakota just plain out powers any Ranger/Toyota/S-10/Frontier.
    Mah, does this mean your going to sell your ugly duckly Frontier for a Toyota?
    I am a Ford fan and am on my second Ranger. First Ranger went to 96K with absolutely no problems whatsoever. I now own a 1998 Ranger XLT SC 4x4 stepside 4.0 5spd. It has the offroad pkg, 3.73 limited slip, tow pkg, P265x75R16 all terrains, nerfbars, Line-x, K&N air charger, chipped, loaded with all the goodies.. It now has almost 30,000 trouble free miles on it. And, I use my 4x4 as a 4x4 in the Cascade Ranger of Oregon. It has never left me stranded. The Ranger is the best selling compact truck for 13 years straight for a reason.. giving the consumer what they want, the options they want, at a fair price..
  • goobagooba Member Posts: 391
    Well,it seems that Dodge is going to give the consumer what he wants and that is POWER.The 5.9L option on the Dakota CC outpowers anything Ford has even considered for their Ranger.The announcement that GM has purchased HUMMER and is going to offer a smaller and more affordable version puts a big dent in the off road capabilities.
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    The old-school 5.9L doesn't cut it anymore. The 4.7L is better in every way.

    I wouldn't count Ford out of the sport truck race quite yet. The new Cammer 4L in '01 (coming this fall) has 207hp and 238ft/lbs in a lighter package. By all accounts I've read that it's a very quick truck.

    Also, Ford is building an SVT Ranger with either a S/C V6 (probably the 4L), the 3.9L V8 (out of the Lincoln LS), or the 4.6L V8 (out of the Mustang GT). Any of these engines will match the hp output of the 5.9L and be close in torque (all in a truck hundreds of pounds lighter).

    Supposedly, the SVT Ranger will also be AWD making for some great off-the-line traction. Rumors peg it as an '02 model year introduction.

    But, we'll see... SVE has had some really incredible vehicles that never made it to production.

    Don't forget about GM either with their entire new engine lineup. I've heard the top of the line engine for the S10 will be a 4.5L with 250hp.

    Nissan is keeping up with a S/C on the 3.3L with 210hp and 240ft/lbs. I haven't heard any other details on it yet.

    Toyota seems to be falling behind with the Camry-derived 3.4L V6 that remains unchanged for the foreseeable future.
  • goobagooba Member Posts: 391
    The 4.7L may be better in alot of ways,but it is hard to fight cubic inches.If you want more power and torque,the bigger,the better as well as easier to raise hp and torque.
  • steve234steve234 Member Posts: 460
    The 5.9 is a much better towing engine than the 4.7 because of the flat torque curve, but in a smaller pickup like the Dakota, it is a marginal gain. I went with the 4.7 because my towing needs are not more than 20%. The problem is that a person that does a lot of towing over 4000 lbs is probably better off with a full size pickup. I have wondered why the rangers do not have the v8 available since it is in the Explorer. I suspect that Since the Explorer has a stiffer frame and more tail weight, it is better able to handle the added engine weight and power. I have heard of tales about the Dakotas with the 5.9 being a little touchy on slick surfaces because of the heavy front.
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    Lets not forget the optional DEALER installed SuperCharger for the Tacoma that allows it to toast any stock 4x4, period.

    And if you want to start talking recalls, reliability, and offroad performance, we all know who the winner is there......

    The Toyota Tacoma.

    Question this statement, and I will flood this site with more data and facts than you can shake a stick at.
  • goobagooba Member Posts: 391
    Sorry,the Toyota even with the supercharger falls below the Dodge 5.9L.It will not toast that one.Besides 3200 for an addional few horses does not seem worth the investment.
    Toyota does put out a good vehicle,but they do have some problems as well as the others.In this forum the off road performance is probably better then the others.
  • cygnusx1cygnusx1 Member Posts: 290
    Spoog, flood away. We'll be here.
  • xena1axena1a Member Posts: 286
    Please don't encourage him!!!

    BTW - Has anyone heard any additional info on those bozos who were on vacation in Colorado and managed to get their vehicles stuck on an off-limits 70% slope? I heard that they were going to try to winch the vehicles either up or down the mountain. No one seems to be willing to give them a hand with their precarious situation...
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    "Sorry,the Toyota even with the supercharger falls
    below the Dodge 5.9L."

    A Supercharged 4x4 Toyota Tacoma will soundly whip a 5.9 Dodge dakota 4x4.

    Im telling you man, its not even funny how FAST the Tacomas are with that Charger.
  • goobagooba Member Posts: 391
    The Dodge has 245hp and 335ft/lbs of torque.It out pulls the Toyota,and for significantly less money.If a person wanted more power out of the Dodge it would be cheaper and less stressful on the engine.
    The Toyota has:

    Maximum hp gain at 5200 RPM is + 75 hp.

    Maximum torque gain at 5200 RPM is + 77 lb.ft.

    Peak hp increase is 64 hp (187 hp – 251 lb.ft.)

    Peak torque increase is 50 lb.ft. (225 lb.ft. – 275 lb.ft.)

    Supercharged V6 produces as much torque at 1800 RPM (225 lb.ft.) as the normally-aspirated V6 does at its peak.
  • steve234steve234 Member Posts: 460
    There were three slams on Fords before I made that off-the-cuff remark. If a couple of those people who made snide comments about Ford being number one in pickup sales would actually look at the numbers, they would see that the full size Fords outsell all the fullsize Chevy and GMC trucks combined. The same with the Ranger and S10. I do not care who makes the most vehicles and do not think that it is pertinent in this forum. This should be a discussion on the merits of the vehicles. How many people have bought a boat from you based only on how many are bought in the nation.
    spoog: Anybody can add a turbo/supercharger to a truck. You could get a blower as a dealer installed Mustangs in the sixties. Power is not everything, the key is how it is used and how practical. The 5.9 is a stout engine, but is not a quick engine. However, it will beat the Toy in most hot rod categories.
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    You still can get a factory warrantied S/C on a Mustang ala the Saleen S351 or the Saleen S281. I think you can also get one from Roush and Steeda too.

    I'd put my money on either of the Dodge V8s against a S/C Toyota.
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    Have you ever ridden in a 4x4 off-road pkg Ranger? It's quite the difference (much stiffer) from some 2wd model. Also, I can't say that I like the styling on any of the Ranger 2wd trucks (except the Trailheads, which are mock 4x4s).

    The flareside sport 2wd Rangers look decent, but you need to work with them (roll pan, billet grill, lid, rims/tires, etc...) to make them look really nice.

    After driving a Toyota around for about 4yrs I got sick of the plain-jane functional styling. A vehicle can be both stylish and functional. The imports just haven't quite gotten to making them fit together well yet.
  • barlitzbarlitz Member Posts: 752
    Just to let you all know I am in the process of ordering a 2001 Ranger,it will be the new 4.0 V6 with new auto trans.It will have the offroad package with the 4.10 limited slip axle,4x4 supercab with 4 doors which are standard now along with 4 wheel abs.The first thing I will do is install a new flowmaster dual rear exit exhaust,order a superchip from Mike over at F150online and I'm strongly leaning towards a supercharger kenne bell if one is made for this engine.My current truck will be up for sale with photos posted at the www.f150online classifieds.
  • mahimahimahimahi Member Posts: 497
    No, I haven't ridden in a 4x4 Ranger well, except once but it was a '85 or '86 model or something like that and it's suspension was modified. But I haven't which is probably the all the difference I'd be looking for. That's another thing, when Ranger is mentioned or even S-10 all I think is 2wd. That's all you'll ever see here in FL. Even in North Florida,much more rual and more like Alabama and Georgia. What I do see is a ton of Z-71's and F-150 offroad's and many many tons of Toyota 4wd's(just about as many Prerunners). So maybe when I think of the looks of the Ranger the 2wd model with it's 'bobo' tires pops in my mind.

    The comments I made about the sales figures weren't meant to be snide. I was just saying that nobody knows what these numbers include. I'm not saying that they don't out sell the other brands, what I am saying is without the information of what these numbers include we REALLY don't know by how much. Since there are restrictions to gov't agencies about buying imports it's not a fair measurement to include gov't sales. Since they all sell their products retail those would be the correct sales figures in which to use as a baseline. But you're right...we shouldn't be worrying about who sells how much here.
  • eagle63eagle63 Member Posts: 599
    I don't own a ZR2 but I am a fan. what year is yours?

    look out everyone, spoog is ranting on about the tacoma engine band-aid. -oops, I mean supercharger. the Japanese auto builders still don't realize that the best way to get true torque is with displacement. the more cubes the better!
This discussion has been closed.