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

15681011

Comments

  • mmcbride1mmcbride1 Member Posts: 861
    What happened to the kinder, gentler you? He actually could make valid points and see other people's POV's...oh, well.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    OK, OK, I'll back off. I just get sick and tired of the half truths about what is available on the Ranger. If people are going to make a comparison they need to let other people know that the Ranger has upgrades for very, very little extra money to match or beat other compacts in payload, towing ect...
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    "If people are going to make a comparison
    they need to let other people know that the Ranger
    has upgrades for very, very little extra money to
    match or beat other compacts in payload, towing
    ect..."


    And what and where are these upgrades Vince?
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    To answer your question, the most obvious are:

    - payload package for $150
    - off-road package for $350

    Both would probably cost 5X those amounts in aftermarket parts to add those options/functionality to the truck.
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    You've also got a 4.10 Limited Slip Rear Diff for $350. You can get a more road-biased 3.73 LSD for $250. There's even a 3.55 LSD for those who are really after highway-biased gearing but still want the better traction of a LSD.
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    I misquoted the price on the payload package. It's $64, not $150.

    The off-road package is $336.
  • david6david6 Member Posts: 75
    I know I've read this on one of the threads here at Edmunds, but could you or someone else explain the advantages and disadvantages of the gearing ratio? I forget which way to go if I want acceleration.
    I'm thinking of getting a Ranger with a LSD, and will be doing mostly no-load or light load driving - only occasional heavy loads (Once every couple of weeks on average). Plus, I'm leaving behind my Integra, so speed/acceleration/handling will be missed. What gearing would be appropriate?
    Thanks for any info.
  • eagle63eagle63 Member Posts: 599
    The higher the gearing numbers, the quicker the acceleration and the more you can tow. the downside is that you lose some MPG. but it's a truck, so big deal. -eagle
  • superjim2000superjim2000 Member Posts: 314
    Lets start with a 3.08 as an example. Good mileage and acceleration. Now lets go to a 3.42. Better acceleration, worse mileage. The higher the axle ratio the better acceleration and more gas used. Definately get Fords version of posi, its well worth it whatever the price.
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    I'd go with either the 3.55 or 3.73 limited slip diffs for your application.

    The 3.08 is just too tall. The truck will always feel like it's bogging off the line. If it's the 3L V6 with an auto tranny, it will have trouble holding top gear on the highway if you should happen along a small hill. The 4L is better due to its abundant torque. It's terrible with the 4cyl. It just gets real annoying with all of the constant shifting.

    The 4.10s sound too short for your application. I'd only get those if you've got either of the V6s and tow and/or off-road often.

    I'd go with the 3.73s if you get the 3L and either of the 3.73s or 3.55s if you get the 4L.
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    4.10 is the only way to go when offroading. But the others are ok for light trail/forest road duty.
  • david6david6 Member Posts: 75
    Thanks for the lesson and all of the input. Gas mileage is a concern, but since it'll be such a huge change compared to the Integra, I'll be just as annoyed even if I'm saving a MPG ar two. Since I like acceleration, I'll be getting the 4L engine, and I'm torn between the 3.73 and the 3.55. Based on my second sentence here, I guess I'll go with the 3.73 - I think this makes sense still when I take into account that it'll be 4x4 automatic and I'll need to be able to get out of mud pits on job sites.
    Thanks again.
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    Sounds like the way to go. With that configuration you can just eek out 20mpg on the highway running with the cruise at 65mph.

    You can really wake up a 4L with about $500 in mods. Get a KKM Tru-Rev Induction Kit (www.kustomz.com for $90), a cat-back exhaust (Gibson or Borla, about $250), and a Superchip (www.smartyparts.com for $175, mention Ranger Power Sports). It really makes a huge difference. You'll be approaching 200hp and 260ft/lbs of torque.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    I would have to agree the 3.73 and 3.0 combo is great for all around duty for the Ranger. I have a friend who has a this same setup in his 4x4 Ranger in the 5spd version. He has never had any problems pulling or hauling anything he has wanted to. I highly recommend a limited slip rearend, and go for the towpkg and hauling pkg its cost is under $500 total.
    Spoog, where does it say the Tacoma can pull 6,000lbs? With the new 4.0 SOHC in the 2000 Ranger it is now rated at 6,000 lbs!! Once again, nice try...
  • guitardudeguitardude Member Posts: 44
    The higher the gears, the more rpm yur gonna have to give yur truck to get to a certain speed. My '84 ranger came with dual limited slips and 4.11 gear ratio. At 65 the rpm's are pretty high, and the truck only gets about 14 mpg. That's with a small 2.8l v6. If it had higher gearing, like 3.55's, it would probably have much better gas milage. But it's a little too late to make any changes. It does lots of pulling and light fourwheeling around farm fields. And it has pulled 6000+ pounds. Not very fast, but it's pulled about that much. It's pulled a 70's f-150 with a loaded trailer out of mud at a job site. It's also pulled a horse trailer full of wet hay through a field of knee-deep mud.
  • pocahontaspocahontas Member Posts: 802
    Edmund's road test of the 2000 Toyota Tacoma PreRunner is now available. Here's the direct link to the Spin Around Town: 2000 Toyota Tacoma PreRunner, by Neil Dunlop. What do you think?

    Happy Motoring. ;-)

    Pocahontas,
    Edmunds.com/Roving Host
  • soggydogsoggydog Member Posts: 67
    This is a question for those of you who purchased a new compact trucks in the last six months. Lets say your dealer called you up and told you to bring your truck back and you would receive a full refund. For the same money, would you buy another just like it or would you buy another brand? Forget brand loyalty and think about what you don't like about your truck now that you had it for a while. I have had my 2001CC for two months and 4000 miles. I,m not wild about the salsa color because it's hard to keep clean. I'm getting used to the fender flares and the fact that it seems to appeal to the younger generation. I have had a lot of kids say "cool truck dude". So far my answer is yes, I would buy another Frontier, just a lighter color.
  • 2k1trd2k1trd Member Posts: 301
    Well i'm on my 3rd tacoma so what does that tell ya.....
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    I'm on Ranger #2. Whatever my next truck is, it will be an ext-cab, tho.

    I wouldn't mind V8 power either before the dino juice is all used up (just for kicks).
  • scotti81scotti81 Member Posts: 15
    I'd stick with my ZR2. I love my truck.
  • mahimahimahimahi Member Posts: 497
    Love my 2000 CC 4x4!!!!!!!
  • steve234steve234 Member Posts: 460
    Now if the dealer called and said I could have my money back and keep my truck, that would be a great deal. Otherwise, I am sold on the value of my Quad. Make the same deal in five years and we'll see.
  • xena1axena1a Member Posts: 286
    Interesting question. I've had two trucks in the last year. I traded in my '99 Mazda B3000 4X4 because I felt it was underpowered and noisy for extended road trips. I'm now driving a '00 Dakota Reg Cab 4X4 V8 5-speed. Very happy with the truck so far. Fuel costs are only a couple of bucks a week more with the Dodge. And the fun factor is much higher with the Dakota. I wish it had a larger gas tank. That's about it. I love this truck...
  • cygnusx1cygnusx1 Member Posts: 290
    I'd definitely buy another Frontier in a heartbeat. Never been more happy with a vehicle purchase in my whole life. 2 thumbs up.

    Hey CT, what are your thoughts on adding a pop charger in place of the stock air box?
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    "pop charger"???

    Do you mean something like an open air filter element like a K&N FIPK?


    I've got a KKM Tru-Rev Kit on my Ranger. It makes a bit more intake noise (but this is a nice V8 sounding type of noise). It also adds a couple of ponies and maybe 1mpg. They are definately a worthwhile investment especially when coupled with a decent cat-back exhaust. Mine was $90 from Kurtz Kustomz Motorsports.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    On my 2nd Ranger, wouldn't trade my present one for nothing. Well, wait a minute, I lied. I would trade it for the new 2001 Offroad Ranger pkg with all its goodies and the new SOHC 4.0 in a 5spd, OH Yeah, dreamin is fun..
  • rickc5rickc5 Member Posts: 378
  • cygnusx1cygnusx1 Member Posts: 290
    Yeah, the round/cone shaped filter. On the Frontier it goes in place of the air box. It' s $120, lasts 50,000 miles, and is made by a performance company that specializes in Nissan parts.

    I'm still waiting on a catback to come out for the Frontier. They are available for the older Nissan trucks, but not on the new ones. Gibson claims they are building one, but who knows.
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    That sounds like exactly what I've got on my truck. It's definately worth it.

    I like my Gibson exhaust. The tone is great, and the both power and economy increases are substantial. But, I would have gone with one that had less pieces for easier installation. Mine had 4 pieces. It made lining them up and hanging everything straight kind of a PITA.

    Maybe Borla has got something by now for your truck. The Gibson stainless systems are actually more expensive than the Borla stainless systems. The Gibson aluminized (what I've got) is a good deal cheaper. Using the 1/3 off coupon at Carparts.com, I got my exhaust for $190 including shipping.
  • ziggy10ziggy10 Member Posts: 41
    Well, I've had my 2000 Tacoma V6 2WD 5Spd for a year now (9K miles) and it has had NO problems yet. It still even has a new car smell to it (even though the inside is messy right now). I love this truck, especially the V6. Anytime I haul stuff to the dump or lumber for home projects, it doesn't even feel like there's anything in the bed--- that's power.
    While in school for a month I was able to rent a Ford Xcab XLT auto (I think it had the small engine), and also a Chevy S-10. I would just like to tell you what I experienced with all three trucks.

    Taco-- love everything about it except two things: the seats could be more comfortable (1) and the cupholders are in a semi-bad spot (2)

    That's all I can complain about--ergonomics.

    Ford-- nice looking, the most comfortable of the bunch, but there were a few things I didn't like about it: stereo/cd sound was sad compared to my Toy(1). Also when I was going down the highway and hit a bump, it felt as though the whole back end was bouncing out of control and at an angle other than straight-- this actually made me nervous and I had to slow down (WAS doing about 75 in a 65 zone--- but to do that to me on a freeway??? Come on!!)(2). The last thing was the acceleration --- this truck had none(3). I had to stomp on it hard to get this heavy truck into traffic and then listen to the transmission almost blow up while it went through its gears.

    In short, I guess if I was a highway driver I "might" pick this truck, until I hit bumps on the freeway. That was scary.

    S-10 A good truck. I still didn't care for the sound system compared to my Toy. The S-10 had a better center console and better storage than the other two. It also had excellent acceleration and ran real quick from stop signs and such. The ride "felt" more like a car than a truck because you sit so low in the 2WD(1). The worst thing about "this" particular S-10 was the rattles(2). At only 8K miles on it, it was rattling in several places and that turned me off for a truck with so few miles.

    Other than the rattles this truck was alright.

    Soggydog:
    After driving these 3 trucks, I can honestly say that I would still keep the Tacoma. Especially the V6 5Spd. It's an excellent truck. If money weren't an option and I could get into the boonies, I would get the 4WD Taco before any other vehicle (even a jeep)!!! I like these Tacomas........
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    Pretty bias comparison wouldn't you say? A V6 Tacoma vs a 4cyl Ranger and S-10? Sounds like your Tacoma is also a grade higher as far as interior goes also. Do you have any idea where your truck rates in comparison to crash tests? interior room? third door options? May want to take a quick look.
  • ziggy10ziggy10 Member Posts: 41
    It is a biased comparison because I drove all 3 trucks and decided which one I like. Therefore I stated which one I was biased towards, didn't I? Regardless of the Ranger engine size, I didn't like the way the back end LEFT the pavement on the freeway several times when I hit a large enough bump. My Tacoma doesn't do that.

    And that's why I wouldn't want a Ranger; because I like to feel more in control of my vehicle and the Tacoma and S-10 both had more control than the Ranger.

    As far as interior goes, I think I stated that the Ranger also had the CD player and stereo (don't remember if the S-10 did or not). I also stated that I didn't like the sound systems as well as my Tacoma. That's my opinion and NOT yours. You make up your own opinion, O.K.???? If my Tacoma with 9k miles has no rattles at all, and an S-10 with 8k miles is rattling in several places, what does that tell me about quality? That tells me that it's not as good as a Tacoma on the interior. And that's my impression and opinion too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Crash tests??? So what!!!
    If I get slammed into froom the side on any compact truck, my chances are slim to none on survival any ways. Trust me, that's how my Grandfather died two years ago.

    All three trucks had virtually the same interior room space. The Ranger DID have more comfortable front seats (my opinion), but now that you mention it, I didn't like the sideways sitting rear seats (I've sat in them too, and it's very cramped). Again my opinion.

    And I didn't buy a COMPACT TRUCK for its third door. If I wanted a third door, I would've bought a car or a bigger truck!!!! And I don't need those. I needed a light hauler with good power and my Tacoma does it for me just fine, MAYBE better than your Ranger and the S-10. I don't know because I didn't haul stuff with them.

    But in my opinion, the Tacoma is TOPS!!!! If you don't like that, too bad.

    Have a nice day

    So I've taken my look and decided. And I like the Tacoma in many ways MORE than the Ranger and S-10. And if you don't agree, fine. Have a nice day.
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    What year Ranger was that?

    I used to have a '95 Ranger that had the "bump steer" that you're describing.

    They made some big revisions to the rear suspension in '98 to rid the truck of this problem. I bought a '98 a few years ago and haven't experienced bump steer in it or any other late model Rangers that I've driven out on the highway (at least 5 of different cab and bed configs).
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    "If my Tacoma with 9k
    miles has no rattles at all, and an S-10 with 8k
    miles is rattling in several places, what does that
    tell me about quality? That tells me that it's not
    as good as a Tacoma on the interior. And that's my
    impression and opinion too"


    The numbers back up your info. JD Powersl ong term quaity tests, NHSTA sites, ect ect.

    Don't worry about Vince, he's just a drunk redneck.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    Also in respect to Vince8's comments, if safety is
    really an issue, keep in mind the vastly superior
    braking system on the Tacoma. Thanks to a link
    provided by Ranger owner cpousnr a few weeks ago,
    we know that the Tacoma's superior brakes will take you from 55 to 0 in 110 feet while the deadly
    Ranger brakes require an additional 30 feet at 140
    feet from 555 to 0. Good brakes have kept me out of accidents and saved my hind end many times in the past.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    That should read "140 feet from 55 to 0". If the Ranger could do 555 mph to 0 I'd buy one too.
  • superjim2000superjim2000 Member Posts: 314
    We all know they wont get treated the same as our own trucks, underpaid employees running around in em, washing em etc.

    So the only way to truly compare trucks is to drive new ones with the options that you as the potential buyer want. I worked at a Ford dealer and I can tell you horror stories of rentals with less than 10,000 miles that have been put through hell and, in some cases, more than their fair share of wrecks and repainting.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    I'll have to agree with that. I'd never buy a used rental either.
  • madridjoemadridjoe Member Posts: 28
    I worked for a rental company for 11 years. Cars trucks, and vans. We maintained the hell out of them, but I still wouldn't buy one. The customers do their best to destroy them. I only buy new pick ups and cars. You get what you want, and have total control of how it is maintained from day one. Sure you'll spend a few thousand more, but to me it's money well spent.
  • steve234steve234 Member Posts: 460
    spoog, if vince8 is a drunk redneck, what does that make you? The problem with rentals and fleet vehicles is that they are bought by 'bottom liners' (also refered to as bottom feeders). They are not going to purchase any option that is not needed. They will spend money on do-dads like CD players and ignore the insulation pkgs and speakers. They pay no attention to drivetrains and suspensions. They invariably will have the base engine, the base suspension and a fixed percentage will have manual transmissions to meet a fixed demand.
  • vjanvjan Member Posts: 2
    anyone out there building a truck,, i couldnt find the truck i wanted on the lot so i built a chevy S10, 89 model. i put a 305 in it with a turbo 350 tranny. i used a stock V6 rear( dont know what gears it has but puts the pick up to 60 MPH very nicely. it has a kit to add dual wheels on the back and needs all the tires it can get to hold it to the ground. the engine has an 270 bracket cam with a street dominator intake, headers, dual exaust, 650 edelbrock, and summit gear timing. anyone else have an iteresting build? i also have an 2000 buick regal LS which i love,,the only regreat i have is i didnt go for the GS package. some one asked how it compared to the impala,,,well,,,dont touch my buick, my wife will kill me. thank you for your time,,vince
  • stew2001stew2001 Member Posts: 9
    Hello, I am the happy owner of a 99 Dakota RT. i love everything about it, but the gas mileage, which really is nothing because I enjoy this truck so much. in the compact sport truck market, nothing comes close!!!!! I hope to have a 01 4.7 2WD Sport sitting right next to her sometime in the next few months. Brian
  • volfyvolfy Member Posts: 274
    in the compact sport truck market,
    nothing comes close... because the Dakota is a mid-size truck.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    Nothing comes close right now, that is. Wait until the Ford Adrenalin hits the market..:-).
  • stew2001stew2001 Member Posts: 9
    By EPA standards and price the Dakota is a compact truck. In the EPA's eyes there are no midsize trucks, just Fullsize and compact, the Dakota falls into compact :)

    Brian
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    The EPA determines vehicle class by interior volume (cubic feet). And, Dakota pricing is higher than 3 of the 4 compacts (it's about the same as the expensive-for-what-you-get Tacoma).
  • j_j_kiddj_j_kidd Member Posts: 19
    Really stretches the imagination to call one of those a truck. I have a 00 with 24,000km and it has been nothing but problems. Dakota is not worthy to be called a truck, might make a good boat anchor if pollution wasn't a factor.
  • xena1axena1a Member Posts: 286
    Sorry to hear that you are having problems with your Dakota. I've been very pleased with mine. No one wants or expects to have excessive trouble with a new vehicle. A co-worker of mine is in much the same boat as you. His '00 Tacoma recently had a defective rear axle replaced along with the half of the rear suspension. Add to that a flaky electrical system that has left him stranded on two occasions, and, well, you can imagine his chagrin...
  • steve234steve234 Member Posts: 460
    I don't know what the basis for you saying the
    Dakota is expensive. The reason I bought my Dakota is that it was a great truck at a lot less than most others. It is less expensive than the Supercrew, the Sporttrac and way less than any Toyota. Add the sweetness of the 4.7 V8 with real backseat room and it is a great bargain.
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    What kind of numbers are you seeing for MPG? Considering a Dakota but am concerned about efficiency. My boss has Durango and he said he gets 12 to 16 MPG, although I think Durango may be heavier. Do you have 4WD and are you satisfied with ride smoothness? I really like the style, size and interior of the Dakota.
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.