TOYOTA TACOMA vs FORD RANGER- Part XI

1202123252668

Comments

  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    What I was simply using is called sarcasm my friend. I was rebutting his comment using an extreme example. His comment that there were more posts in the Tacoma room than the Ranger room was completely false too so I just pointed that out. I wasn't debating the content of the posts. Lighten up a bit and don't try to over-defend the Ranger. Both trucks are good trucks with their own distinct advantages. I just don't appreciate false info and/or out right lies being posted to defend a position.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    The Tacoma is the better truck! I am running down to the Toyota dealer right now and trading my Ranger! Just because steel, and allknowing say so!
    Allknowing, you have one heck of a chip on your shoulder for me. Someone even entered the room knowing nothing about our past and can see your attitude towards me. I really did a job on that "Toyota is god" bubble huh?. As much as the Toyota boys want to wish and wish, the new SOHC 4.0 puts the Ranger ahead in HP/Torque and torque curve.
  • tacoma_trdtacoma_trd Member Posts: 135
    I owned a 98 x-cab ranger for 2 years and I now own a 2000 Tacoma x-cab V6 4x4 5spd loaded. I much rather the tacoma in all aspects. I have a friend who just bought a loaded off road ranger 4x4 xlt with the new 4.0 SOHC. His may be a little faster but his quality level is not the same I find. My does not rattle or make a noise, it is built solid. If you lean on his bed it will squeak or make wierd noises. My 98 ranger rattled pretty bad, and all of this is on road, but I never had any problem with it except I needed a new 3rd gear on my 5 spd. I sold it with 27,000 miles. I just really wanted a Tacoma. Off road, my Tacoma performs great, I have added roll bars and a grill guard both with KC lights, a 3 inch lift, American Racing rims, and 32 x 11.5 Goodyear Wrangler MT/R's. This puppy is sweet. I like it more every day I drive it. One day I will have some pics and post them but for now good luck with your trucks, tacoma or ranger.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    Boy, nothing that guy says is original. He even copies steelman's post in the same day. If I didn't already know that the Ranger was a pretty decent truck, I would never buy one with that goofs endorsement. Even more amazing is that he may not realize how ------ he's perceived to be.
  • eagle63eagle63 Member Posts: 599
    Somebody in the "S10 VS. Tacoma" forum just stated that the Tacoma is available with a limited slip. is this true? If it is, then it should pretty much put Vince's whining to rest.
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    Eagle-

    The Toyota Tacoma won the Pickup of the Year Award this year- beat out a full size GM, CHevy, Frontier, and S-10.

    The tacoma also got "ultimate 4x4" from the fourwheeler.com, winning a contest against the hummer, jeep, and range rover.

    " The toyota tacoma trd could go places other trucks simply couldnt"

    fourwheeler

    " The Tacoma beat the hummer offroad" - fourhweeler, may issue, 2001
  • theurinaltheurinal Member Posts: 11
    Is your real name Dick or is that just what people call you?
  • thehitcherthehitcher Member Posts: 56
    I have a 99 Taco and it has performed flawlessly. I was a Ford fanatic once, but prefer quality over price.
  • eagle63eagle63 Member Posts: 599
    are you sure it wasn't the Dodge Dakota Quad cab?? -or was that last year's winner?
  • rmacias_rmacias_ Member Posts: 37
    Well, I have to say that I'm very impressed with the service I just received at the Toyota Dealership. Last week I noticed that my TRD 4x4 was pulling slightly to the left at highway speeds. So, I made an appointment at the dealership for a front-wheel alignment.

    Upon arriving to the dealership a Service Consultant greeted me at my truck even before I was able to open my door. I described the problem then went off to work. Later in the day when I went to go pickup my Truck the Service Consultant explained to me that they had verified the problem but also noticed some steering wheel vibration. Apparently, it was more than they liked to see for a new Truck. I said fine and proceeded to the Cashier to pay the bill. She handed me a detailed list of what was performed on the truck: 4-wheel alignment, 4-wheel balance, 4-wheel rotation, total = $149.55. I looked at the total and thought "ouch" that's more than I had planned for. At that point the Service Consultant approached me and said "don't worry about the bill we will cover it under warranty".

    After that, he walked me to my truck opened the door handed me my keys and a survey for the service and sent me on my way. I couldn't believe it, not once was I ever treated this way at any dealership especially the three Ford dealerships in town. The great Service I just received makes me even more convinced I made the right selection between Trucks.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    turned to name calling.
    Why is it ok to defend and rant and rave about the TAcoma but not a Ranger? Hmmm...
    I am a Ranger fan and you Toyota boys just don't like it!
    Well, at almost 40K I have had my Ranger to the dealer ONCE!! for a broken gas cap! My Ranger runs fine, solid as the day I bought it. I know everyday I made the right choice in not spending the extra dollars for image or this huge quality gap that Toyota Tacoma owners want people to believe exists .
    Limited slip for the Tacoma?? Where please link..
    If this is true then I guess Toyota was listening. You guys who own Tacoma's really hate the flaws I have brought to your attention in your trucks. I believe the Ranger is the top compact truck on the market today. And now with the SOHC 4.0 it will stay ontop.
    Once again, I have NEVER said the Tacoma was not a good truck, or an unreliable truck, check my past posts. I am being bashed for being a Ranger fan and disputing others who bash the Ranger or say the Ranger can't 4x4, or pull, or tow, or make it to 25K miles without falling apart..
    Enjoy your one wheel drive Tacoma's
    Enjoy those stickers...
  • theurinaltheurinal Member Posts: 11
    I just noticed that the Ranger Problem room has 37 more posts in the last three weeks than the Tacoma Problem room. 10 in the Ranger room say that they won't ever buy a Ranger again. Hmmm.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/roadtests/roadtest/45955/article.html


    "The Tacoma PreRunner package was developed in conjunction with Toyota Motorsports' successful desert racing-truck program."


    "While sure, the PreRunner looks like a cool 4x4, it simply doesn't have the capability of a 4x4 truck. We found out the hard way, by getting this machine thoroughly stuck in the sand at an off-highway vehicle area located on California's Pismo Beach. Along with three other jacked-up two-wheel-drive trucks -- a Nissan Frontier Desert Runner, a Ford Ranger Edge and a Mazda B-4000 Dual Sport -- the Toyota had to be pulled out of the sand by a 15-year-old beater Mitsubishi 4x4 pickup . . ."


    Just curious, does the locker come with the TRD option?


    If so, why did it get stuck?

  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    now that the Ranger has the new SOHC 4.0, 205HP/240ft/lbs of torque engine, 0-60 times don't matter anylonger to the Toyota crowd...
    I have the old 4.0 with 160HP and 225ft/lbs of torque, no racer by any means. The engine is designed to pull, tow and haul (what a truck should do) with its low end torque curve. I have been in this room and a member of Edmunds for about 2 years now. Many of you are the same crowd that perfer a Ranger or Toyota. Many of the Toyota crowd used to put the Ranger down for its weak 0-60 performance, now that the tide has turned you seemed to have become silent.
  • remainedsilentremainedsilent Member Posts: 9
    You're right I am remained silent. The Toyota will still be faster 0 - 60 and has a 30 foot advantage in stopping distance due to the bigger brakes and less weight. The Ford 4.0 is also prone to a lot of problems while all of the Toyota 3.4 problems have been taken care of a long time ago. If you have a few days to spare go to the eternal Explorer woes page and read through the hundreds or maybe thousands of complaints about the Ford 4.0 engine.
  • theurinaltheurinal Member Posts: 11
    You took the words out of my mouth remainedsilent. You would be surprised how many Ranger owners don't realize how poor the stopping distance is in a Ranger compared to a Tacoma 4x4 or a Prerunner. That's why the death rate is so high in the Ranger compared to the Tacoma. I've also educated lots of Ranger owners of the fact that a locking rear end is not available on the Ranger like the Tacoma making it far inferior to the Tacoma off the road.
  • midnight_stangmidnight_stang Member Posts: 862
    rEMainedsilent-> Have you driven a 4.0l ranger vs a toyota 3.4? You might want to restate the short time (0-60) on toyota being faster. I drove both in manual trim, and the Ranger definately put more snap into my neck. Maybe there is a little comfusion between the pushrod 4.0l (160 hp) and the new modular SOHC 4.0l(205-207hp) too. Ford modular engines are fantastic, for instance the v8 4.6l in my mustang gets over 22 mpg in the city, and that's outdriving pretty much all else on the road. As far as braking I can't find any statistics on the 01 Ranger, (With STANDARD ABS and upgraded front and rear brakes, I bet Rangers are a tough contender if not better this year.)
  • eagle63eagle63 Member Posts: 599
    isn't the ranger heavier than the tacoma? wouldn't that explain the stopping distance?
  • smgillessmgilles Member Posts: 252
    //Hi cncman. Not much going on here. Nissan seems to be really trying to earn market share from Toyota/Honda. The new Max is going to have 225HP? and the new Altima is going to be about the same size with a 190HP V6? and a normally aspirated 170HP 4cyl as standard?? Wow, sounds too good to be true. Now lets hope Nissan can keep the prices at bay, and they will come.
    Ford on the other hand seems to be on a downward spiral they just can't get out of. First the Firestone/Explorer fiasco, next the Escape flop, now the Escape crash test flop, Focus recalls, delay of new Explorer due to design flaws.. list just goes on and on. I don't even think GM has had it this bad. I have to admit, even I'm starting to wonder about Ford. My Ranger runs great at 40K miles.. but all this bad news makes me think twice about maybe looking at other models..//

    Sounds like these Toyota guys have you seeing the light. This was Vince's post from comarison site of ranger, tacoma, s-10, mazda....
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    Looking around at websites and vehicle reviews in the car rags, I seem to notice extremely large variations in stopping distances.

    They range from a best of 119'(sports-car territory) in a review of the new Ranger Edge a few months ago to some that are close to 160'(jumbo sport-ute territory).

    What gives here?
  • midnight_stangmidnight_stang Member Posts: 862
    Eagle63->I don't think weight equates to braking distance, but it is definately a factor. I was asking for some posted fact, or hopefully a web link on statistics, but I couldn't find any yet.

    Smgilles-> Ford has had some bad press, but you can only take press coverage as a third party view. Their priority is to fill up their 30 minute broadcasts with whatever they can get their hand on. (Remember the coverage on GHB [Date rape drug] on Dateline? How somebody was found raped and killed, and had traces of GHB in their system. They neglected to say that GHB is found in ALL animal meat, even humans. It's a hormone commonly found. My point is they see an angle and attack, and are basically gossiping most of the time). The Firestone tire problem had nothing to do with Ford, except that Ford happened to choose that tire for equipment. I applaud Ford's devotion to correct this matter, however, it was handled quickly, and steps are in place to prevent it from happening again. But Firestone is a supplier to Ford, but not under any Ford umbrella. The Escape was recently in a 5-mph crash test against other SUV's and 1/2 ton trucks. It was the only truck/SUV that got a Above Average rating. This was on MSN, but I'll have to search for the link. Also of note was the Escape had the lowest cost to repair the front and rear 5-mpg crash test. Other entries were the f-150, ram, Sierra, and I think a Tundra.
    Ford Explorer has 100,000 pre-ordered through dealers, and they expect over 250,000 for the model year. That makes it the most popular SUV! Mustang's have outsold Camaro's and Firebirds combined, and now they're gone. Explorer, Focus, Escape, and Mustangs sales are still growing. Ford is doing well nowadays, and isn't going anywhere. Their market share is increasing. That contradicts any characteristic flaws that a small minority voice. Numbers count. . .

    So maybe the consumer market is vastly un-informed, or just don't care, or maybe they know the great deal they get when they choose Ford. Ford's commitment to addressing issues is great (Stubborn service/dealers excluded) Find yourself a dealer who drives what they sell, and are committed to customer service, and you won't have any problems. I'm lucky because the dallas market is full of Ford dealers, so they are all very competitive in price and service. Ford is still the best selling truck in Texas hands down. Maybe because we Texans experience a lot heat, dirt, and off road conditions (even on road). There are more F-150's, 250's, 350's, and Rangers on the road here than any other brand. They wouldn't be here unless their up to the rough environment here, and their owners know that.

    And new for '01 would be Safety belt pretensioners, Second Generation air bags, Sucurilock anti theft, and four wheel ABS, electronic brake force distribution(Brake balancing), upgraded front rotors, four leaf rear springs and redesigned shocks up front, ALL STANDARD on ALL MODELS(Securilock may actually only be on V6's but maybe the new I-4, I'm unsure.) All this is verifiable at media.ford.com.

    I just love the fact that I'll be buying a 4.0l Edge Plus ranger, reg. cab, manual for around 15,000 excluding TTL, and trade in(Might keep my 93 and just put a 351 windsor in it). That's another nice thing about Fords, the interchangability. I can drop in a v8, and while the trasmission was built for a four cylinder, it'll still bolt up. Aftermarket supremacy is definately a factor in my love of Ford. Chevy might be a contendor on this fact, but no imports make the cut at all in the aftermarket and interchangability scene.

    PS. Today I saw a brand new 01 Tacoma extended cab, with a SR5 badge on the side. IT IS a nice looking truck, just can't understand the bulbous hood and grill. My preference is definately Ranger (edge) on looks now. I really did like the smaller previous models of tacoma where it was a bit more boxey and not as 'soft' in the curves area(mid to late 90's I think). And does that automatic shifter look like a pistor grip, or did I see it wrong
  • sasquatch_2000sasquatch_2000 Member Posts: 800
    Geez. I have a 1992 Civic hatchback which has NEVER needed an alignment. Tires track true and wear even.

    GOD I WISH HONDA MADE A PICKUP TRUCK!!!!!
  • eagle63eagle63 Member Posts: 599
    I must admit to ignorance regarding braking issues, but here's how my simple mind sees it: what does a good set of brakes do that a mediocre set doesn't do?? I mean, shouldn't any functional set of brakes be able to lock the wheels up? (or make the anti-locks engage if the vehicle has anti-locks) If so, then really the only thing that could affect braking distance would be the weight of the vehicle. -and I suppose tires make a small difference too. Maybe I'm missing something really obvious, but I guess I just don't get it.
  • ebbgreatdaneebbgreatdane Member Posts: 278
    The 4X4 Taco Toy does get larger rotors to assist it's larger towing capacity for the 4X4 models. I would imagine these larger rotors would contribute to shorter stopping distances.

    Depending on how you look at it, the interior size of your wheels limit the size of a rotor you can maintain. Or conversely, the larger the size of the rotor you require/desire, the more room on the inside of the wheel you will need.

    Typically the larger the rotor the better, however, the larger the rotor, the more pistons you will need per caliper and the more heat they will generate. In addition you are adding rotational weight to the center of the wheel which can cause handling to diminish.

    Tacomas compensate for the larger rotors using 4 piston calipers (to evenly distribute pressure over a larger brake pad), a better ventlating rotor and largers wheels (to disperse the gravity field of the rotating wheel - plus they look good).

    John
  • ebbgreatdaneebbgreatdane Member Posts: 278
    I think I like it. Wish I could take the letters off the Tacoma label in the back to spell Taco...

    heh heh
  • midnight_stangmidnight_stang Member Posts: 862
    You can actually stop quicker by not "scratching" your tires. While locking your wheels up may seem like the best way to stop, with ABS you wheels are still allowed to turn which is reportably good for handling in those panic stops. Plus you don't have any bald/low spots on tires. The brakes start to "pulse" which means they pump up and down while you hold the brake pedal down. In crashing my an Accord about 7 years ago, I can attest that they definately allowed me to avoid other cars, just had a telephone pole waiting for me. But anyways, we'll all know when they publish some numbers on braking distance. Weight, center of gravity, weight distribution(front to rear), tire ground pad, air pressure, cargo, and suspension all affect it. So it's all academic until somebody can publish some numbers for us... :)

    Great dane brings up a good point. Larger rotors add to the rotating mass at the end of each axle, which does hinder handling to a degree. That's why aluminum allow wheels are now a factory getup. But the larger rotors do offer more surface area, and that's what helps the stopping.

    Greatdane--->Seems the most I see on the back of the older toyota pickups are "Toyo"... Not as cute as Taco, but seems to be a trend... :)

    Sasquatch--->My 93 Ford has never needed a alignment. Some cars/trucks just get lucky, or the drivers never hit any curbs hard. (Even though I did bust a rim once on the front right, no problems after 140k)
  • lariat1lariat1 Member Posts: 461
    The difference in good brakes and mediocre brakes isthae ability to stop during extended use. all brakes will lock up cold but after a lot of use they get hot and you get "brake fade" this happens when the rotor can no longer dissipate as much heat as there is being generated.This becomes apparent if you tow a heavy trailer and have to use the brakes to much.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    That wasn't me!! Someone has my password!
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    On Sunday...Ranger(2)/Explorer/Tacoma, a Jeep and maybe a lifted Mazda "Head to Head"...

    Up for it?
  • rickc5rickc5 Member Posts: 378
    the wife and I are going to Moab over the weekend to do both some mtn biking and 4-wheeling. Since this will be the first "real" 4-wheeling for the new Expedition, I'll report on how it did after I return next week (Wednesday).
  • ebbgreatdaneebbgreatdane Member Posts: 278
    Yeah, good point...there's just nothing good about it and larger rotors can only help.

    John
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    Sounds good to me.

    It really irks me to see the nitwits commuting back and forth from the city driving solo in a 12mpg, 6000lb, pollutant-spewing, road-hazard of a jumbo-ute.

    Then, I think that 99% of these vehicles never experience the conditions they were designed for. For probably 99/100 of these people, they could drive an infinitely more efficient sedan, wagon, or mini-van and never bring them to their limits.
  • ebbgreatdaneebbgreatdane Member Posts: 278
    You mention the girls in their ExcursSurburan 4X4 at the store. But I spend a lot of time on the bridge navigating in and out of a sea of guys sitting in their F350/3500 rado 4X4 Diesel and/or V10 something-or-other.....explain the need for a 4X4 "work" truck (most of them with a hose cart in the back).

    I would imagine they would argure, "...well I need it for towing and hauling." I guess they missed the section of specs on the Toyota where it tows 5000 lbs or can hold 1500+ lbs. in it's payload. 9/10 I would bet never tow/haul near the Tacoma numbers.

    I will admit that yesterday I say a city Foreman, I assume, getting out of a '97 Tacoma on the site while I sat in traffic. Now we just need the other 8 guys in the 9/10 number to do the same.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    Amusing. Two guys that list their dreams cars as a gas hog ST Cobra and a Ferrari F-22 criticize SUV owners for not using the capabilities of their vehicles. I imagine most buy the big SUVs for safety. Who cares. New vehicles put out very little emissions (if it weren't for the carbon monoxide you could probably breath your vehicle exhaust), and contrary to political correctness, there's plenty of fuel available. If people are willing to spend the money on those vehicles let them. I don't see why people choosing to drive cheap munch-kin tin cans expect to force everyone else to do the same.
  • eagle63eagle63 Member Posts: 599
    amen. the majority of pickup drivers are just as guilty as SUV drivers for not "using their vehicles to their full potential."
  • rickc5rickc5 Member Posts: 378
    Now this is most unusual. I agree with BOTH of you.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    I agree also......
    Economic conditions are holding me back right now from purchasing another vehicle, any of you?
    I work in the high tech industry and things have slowed way down, orders down, buying equipment down, down, down. I really believe the media plays a huge role in how this economy runs. The day after day of bad news is getting old. Its like they have nothing else to report...
    Going to spend some time in Florence Oregon at the end of the month. There are some serious dunes there. Quads are king.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    at least by me.

    You know, while I have no use for a Navigator etc., I do defend the right for someone, if they choose, to own one.

    It is called freedom, a concept some on this board know is not free.

    Finestein would love to have everyone on mopeds, public transportation, Yugo's and the upper ruling class, such as she, riding in the big black, what did the Russians call em. Ladia's. . .
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    haul trees(bed full, super cap part having 3-4), haul water (200 gal.) to the trees, haul my kids college stuff up in the fall, back in the spring, haul its share of 2X4's, haul half a yard of sheep and peet, haul a friends vanity from Home Depot, haul my 76 KZ900 to the shop for a carb tune, haul my sons Honda to the shop, AND. . .

    It even hits the 4 wheel drive trails every so often.

    Cannot kick about 18mpg in town, 21+ hwy. . .

    But dang, a buck seventy five?!?!
    \
    What is every one else paying around the country?
    I need some input for my trip to MAryland end of the month.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    hauling a core aireator (more than likely misspelled that) on Sunday, if this snow would ever stop. . .
  • modvptnlmodvptnl Member Posts: 1,352
    Heart attack time............I agree with you!!

    BTW, it's been proven that straight electric vehicles actually pollute as much as ULEV's. I'll let you guys figure that one out.
  • lariat1lariat1 Member Posts: 461
    No matter which way you look at it to drive a vehicle of any sort it pollutes about the same dosnt matter if the pollution comes from the tailpipe of a car or the smoke stacks of a power plant or if it is buried a nuclear waste the pollution is there you just may not see it.
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    "If interior comfort and refinement are what you are after, then the Ranger is a little lacking when compared to the Toyota Tacoma. But if you're a little light on cash, the Ranger makes a good choice, coming in well-equipped for a little more than $20,000"

    - Edmunds.com. 2001 "Ranger Spin"
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    Because Toyota uses super-sized, heavy duty rotors of the highest qulaity. Toyota knows how to make breaks extremely well. If ford has a weakness, it is terrible break build and quality. I know guys that have warped rotors and messed up breaks every month.

    "

    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. "

    www.fourhweeler.com

    Click on the pickup of the year comparison(98), then click on spec and photos. You will see photos comparing the underside of the ranger and Tacoma, and the brakes. NOW you wil understand why Toyota brakes are so superior. Take that level of quality and heavy-duty engineering and apply that to every other aspect of the finely tuned MACHINE that is the Tacoma.
  • modvptnlmodvptnl Member Posts: 1,352
    Exactly!!!!!

    Spoog....LMAO!!! So when the Toyota "BREAKS" it does so superior to the Ford??? How do the "BRAKES" compare??? Highest "qulaity"???

    Was that you?? Or are you pasting someone else's comment as usual?

    How come "spoog" comes up "spoof" on spell check???
  • eagle63eagle63 Member Posts: 599
    A great quote from spoog: "Why are the breaks on the tacoma so superior?"
    -I don't know, does the Tacoma break a lot?
  • rmacias_rmacias_ Member Posts: 37
    Ranger Fans:

    Why does Ford only offer 3yr/36,000 miles for the Ranger as a drive-train warranty? I thought the Ranger was supposed to have the reliability of the "Superior" Tacoma. I guess Ford doesn't have any faith that their vehicles will last to 5yr/60,000 miles without any major breakdowns.
  • midnight_stangmidnight_stang Member Posts: 862
    Allknowing(ornot)--->A dream car is just that. At least it shows more imagination that repeating your mantra of Toyota in your profile. Also have you seen a LEV badge on many SUV's? I don't think so. The gas milage alone makes me shudder. You missed the point on expensive off road vehicles that never see anything more than pavement or a 2% grade climb all together. But hey, I'm not saying you shouldn't buy these mini-buses, just that you don't need 10 inches of ground clearance to get groceries. They are safer in crashes, because they out-mass most other cars, but they are so top heavy, you got the added risk of tipping over/rolling, or just the huge size that makes it easier to hit. Americans used to like big finned boats for cars, now they are into SUV's. I wonder what the next trend will be.

    Spoog--->Is that the three year old article again? "Click on the pickup of the year comparison(98)" as in 1998? You do know it's the 5th month (out of twelve) of 2001 now, right? I can't even find the article you are trying to show us, so maybe if you just copy the URL from the ADDRESS BAR in Netscape of MSIE, and PASTE it into your post, we'll see what you're referring to.
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    SUV's and truck don't have to meet the same emission standards as cars. This seems strange as this is what 99% of people use them for.

    "contrary to political correctness, there's plenty of fuel available"

    This kind of thinking is what will make the price of gas > $5/gal in a couple of years and cost us a fortune to power and heat our homes.

    "I don't see why people choosing to drive cheap munch-kin tin cans expect to force everyone else to do the same."

    Whoever said that SUV drivers should be "forced" to drive something else? It's a free country. Anybody can drive what they want.

    I think that they should pay for the "privilege" of driving a socially irresponsible vehicle through higher insurance rates and special driver's licenses for vehicles over a certain weight.

    IMO, driving a jumbo 'ute to primarily commute back and forth from work and never using the potential this vehicle was designed for is like using a sledgehammer to hang a picture.

    Can you do it? Yes. Are you more likely to destroy everything around it? Yes.

    BTW, there are many sedans, wagons, and car-based sport 'utes out there that are safer than the road behemoths.
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.