TOYOTA TACOMA vs FORD RANGER- Part XI

1232426282968

Comments

  • issisteelmanissisteelman Member Posts: 124
    I do not need to elaborate any further on something that we all know(or should know) to be fact. Yotas rule! And, they are better quality vehicles (in general) than Fords. I'm sorry that you just don't seem to believe that. If you don't believe it, nothing I say will convince you otherwise anyhow. Why don't you spend a few hundred more dollars on your next truck and upgrade to a Tacoma and maybe then you'll truly understand what I'm talking about. Take care and I'll see you on the logging roads..........Steelman.
  • eharri3eharri3 Member Posts: 640
    Loved every minute of it. The flat, unsupportive seats and cheap, dull interior as well as the rubbery ride quality screamed 'quality' the whole time.
  • davidb72davidb72 Member Posts: 174
    Maybe I'm not ready to "step up" to a Tacoma :-/
    What with all the country music I listen to and all. I might be better off with a 1978 Chevy Stepside... Gun rack... Side mounted spare tire... Or a 1972 with the fuel tank right behind the seat, who ever came up with that???
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    Paying 23 grand for a pickup that beats the hummer, Range Rover and Wrangler in an offroad comparison isn't exactly a bad deal ;)
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    4L V6 OHC 12-valve engine; part-time 4WD; 5-speed automatic transmission; front independent suspension with stabilizer bar, rear rigid suspension with stabilizer bar; power steering; front
    disc/rear drum brakes with 4-wheel ABS; 16" x 6" alloy wheels, P245/75SR16 OWL tires; air conditioning; 4-speaker, AM/FM, cassette, CD Player, and fixed mast antenna; cruise control; engine immobilizer; remote power door locks; power windows, 1 one-touch operation; Instrumentation and warnings include tachometer, clock, door ajar, oil pressure; automatic intermittent wipers; cloth upholstery, split bench front seats; symmetrical folding rear seat; front reading lights; passenger side vanity mirror; leather-wrapped steering wheel with tilt adjustment; power black mirrors; front and rear door pockets.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    tachometer?

    Spoog, I think that Jeep Wrangle was 4X4 of the year in at least 2 other magazines..

    But then, we do not know what Toyota is paying FourWheeler for its ads. . .

    Tacoma, Tin Alloy Crap On My A $$ because I am FORD, First On Race Day.
    To All Creditors, Owe My Assets
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    4Hi selector switch an option on Tacoma?

    What gives with that? No 4Hi without it or another way to select it?
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    true colors!!
    Toyota is pure image.. What is this garbage of "Move up to a Tacoma"?? This just goes to prove a point I have made here at Edmunds for the last 2 years... Toyota has one hell of a marketing scheme and all you Tacoma owners fell for it. Now pay the price, the high price you paid for that image.
    issteel, what logging roads? I will meet you anytime with my Ranger on any logging road and show your Tinoda what a real truck is like. By the way.. You Toyota boys enjoying those pretty TRD stickers??? LOL!!.....
    I went to the dealer tonight to check out a new 2001 Ranger. The deals they are offering on them is far better than Toyota. I could have walked out the door with a loaded 4x4 XLT 4door stepside, nerf bars, SOHC 4.0 automatic, a/c, offroad pkg, tow pkg, p/s, p/b, power windows, CD player, rear slider, loaded Ranger for 20,500!! This is not much more than what I paid for my 1998 like optioned! It was Silver and very tempting.... NO way in Hell will you ever find a Tacoma loaded like that for under 23K....
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    Lighten up my friend, I was just being facetious to davidb72!!!! There must be too much tension in this forum as I didn't think anyone would take me seriously!!!! Then again, anyone normal like youself which wouldn't include vince. Even though I prefer the Tacoma over the Ranger, they're both great vehicles and there certainly isn't any class difference between the owners of either make. I apologize if I got you upset.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    Allknowing has knowledge about both trucks.

    He just prefers the Tacoma. So be it, they are good trucks. But again, you can get a bit more standard on the Ranger and add on what you want.

    Besides, he has not said one word about how unfare it was that the Avalance humiliated the Kings. . .and are now doing the same to the Blues. . .gotta be a decent guy in that respect.

    Those last two Avs games were quite impressive.

    Just hope the rest are as good. . .
  • ebbgreatdaneebbgreatdane Member Posts: 278
    But yes we test drove everything from Rangers to Silverados to Tundras. Before I say anthing else, the Toy does have 4-hi on demand with the base 4X4. You would just have to shift it. The selector button just means I don't have to fish while I'm driving.

    Say what you will but I test drove the Ranger and it doesn't have the quality of a Tacoma. The interior plastics look like something from a cabbage patch doll and I'm not paying for a premium 4X4 package that uses a-never-before-long-term-tested 5spd Auto that goes with it.

    Now the Ranger owners are going to have to answer me this...it's easy...just some supply and demand so stick with me. Rangers are the number one (or whatever) selling compact pickup but you won't find any on the lots and the price is lower than the competition?

    Demand High + Price Low = Supply Low? Economically this is impossible. My suspicion is that the dealers do a pretty good job of masking this in addition to horse trading with other dealers to give the impression that they "might" be able to get it for you. What, Rangers are less expensive because they use cheap wiring...because they can build engines cheaper...because Ford works more effeciently than Toyota? In reality, Rangers probably look more like Demand High + Price Low = Supply High.

    True Tacomas sold probably = 1/10 the amount of Rangers sold. Demand High + Price High = Supply Low. Truely Tacomas are more expensive. But is that because it really costs more to ship the engine and transmission from Japan or becuase a Toyota logo cost more than a Ford logo? Probably not. More than likely Tacomas are more expensive becuase supply is limited and demand is high.

    Dear Ranger Owner: Please tell me at what point in time Rangers or any other Ford product cost as much, or more than it's Japanese counterpart post 1980. Honestly this is why Ford and other American Manufacturers prefer to keep the number of imports down. The higher price of imports would cause any reasonable person to question the value when in fact it's all supply Vs. demand.

    I'm sorry but Ranger is not a better truck because they sell more. Tacomas are not better trucks because they are more expesive.

    Tacomas are better because that's what I and they other Tacoma owners on this post wanted. Rangers are better because that's what the Ranger owners want.

    Ok...I'm a little vaclempt...tawk amongst yourselvess......

    John
  • midnight_stangmidnight_stang Member Posts: 862
    Steelman-->I've test driven both in 2001 trim. They are both compact trucks, and are of very similair quality. Something can be said of both about a utilitarian feel. I just think the Edge package on the Ranger really makes it stand out, especially in Yellow Chrome clearcoat. Mechanically Toyota's, as most imports seem to last longer, but overall quality? I don't see the difference that makes up 1 to 3+k difference in sticker price? Or maybe I just hate that horrible auto trans stick, or ugly upper nose? I'm going with the Ranger, because it's beefier engine, rigid frame, awesome safety, and great looks. If the maintenance is like my current truck, I might have to replace my transmission again in 120k miles, etc. I'll have my future truck paid off in 5 years tops, with payments under 300 a month for a 4.0l reg cab with all the options.

    Spoog-->With the money I'll save on my truck, and the market dominance, I will be able to really hit the aftermarket parts to make my future Ranger a real killer for a 4x2. Think of it this way, spend 23k total on a truck, and see which one has the most going for it? A stock pre-runner, or s-runner, or whatever runner, vs a loaded AND tricked out Ranger?
    My only quandry is to get the 6-disc in dash, or to transfer the alpine system over...?

    Allknowing--->Sorry if I missinterpreted, but ascii text has no emotion, or any indication of a smirk or jest. Had to take it at face value... Next time help me(us) out by putting in a (j/k "just kidding") or other blurb. You know everyone here is on one side of the fence or the other, and will defend anything that looks like slander on their pick.

    greatDane-->That's the miracle of automation and assembly line, which Ford invented by the way. They can do things cheaper because they do much more of it! That allows their plants to produce the volume of trucks and cars they do. I am envious of Honda's with their fiber optic wiring, but really a wire is a wire, as long as it's got low resisitance, and a good insulator, it's only a little extra weight. This makes it much easier me to upgrade the stereo, as I can easily tell which wires are for which speaker, accessory, etc. Haven't had one issue, just wish they would give us some blank fuse spots for any additional equipment use.
    On Economics, I'm not following you. I guess you're making the point that both trucks have their strengths and weaknesses, which I agree they do. But of the 5-6 dealers within twenty miles of here, only a few base models are still there when I return. The Edge's and XLT's and 4X4 are selling very quick. So is your supply representative of inventory, or factory shipped quantity? Either way the consumers cast their votes with their wallets, and should be self-educated enough to buy what they deem acceptable/like. That's the great value Ford represents, and even if I don't argue quality, a "cheaper" truck is "cheaper" to fix or replace. Like I emphasised in previous posts, Ford has shown it's quality to me, and everytime I see the look on the mechanics face when I bring her in for a rotate or inspection, and they see the milage. It's always a double take, and usually a question on what have I replaced by now(which has been a minimum of items detailed in previous posts). I'm just happy I spent less money, less loan time, more money for me and girlfriend, more money for aftermarket toys for the truck, etc.
    About this forum, I don't look at it like trying to convice each other, we all know were we stand, and I doubt anyone will budge. But I look at it as a way for the casual browser/future buyer to gather information from both sides, good and bad... Hopefully it will help someone out, all out ranting and raving... :)

    Maybe I'll rebuild the ole Ford engine at 200,000 miles... Nah, I'll be driving a '01 or '02 by then!
  • indacurl2kindacurl2k Member Posts: 54
    An interesting point ebb. One POSSIBLE reason why the Ranger costs less is because they produce X amount more than Toyota does their Tacoma. Supply/Demand would dictate that if demand is constant; as supply increases, the price drops and if supply decreases the price will increase. Conversely, if supply remains constant; the price will increase or decrease depending upon demand (if demand rises, so will price and vice versa if demand drops, so will price). I do NOT think this explains entirely why Ford sells more Rangers than Toyota sells Tacomas, but it surely should be taken into consideration at least somewhat. I believe that the demand for compact pickups is relatively constant meaning it doesn't change a whole lot from year to year. Furthermore, I believe that Ford produces the Ranger line to meet as much of this demand as possible and that is why they are selling more trucks. Simply put, they offer more varieties of Ranger than Toyota offers ofthe Tacoma. They build more trucks than Toyota does and so this allows them to make them cheaper. I work for a manufacturer and this is generally the rule. The more units you make the cheaper it is to make each unit.

    Before the Ranger fans get all over me, the Ford Ranger is definitely the better VALUE here, I own a Tacoma and openly admit this. I don't go offroad nearly as much as, say, Vince purportedly does. And I'm sure his Ranger can go anywhere I'm going in my Tacoma (a non-TRD). I preferred the Tacoma over the Ranger and I didn't see a problem with spending a little more to get one; it was as simple as that. I do not think I own a FAR superior truck to him. I do NOT see Toyota as a better brand of truck as compared to Ford. I believe Ford offers a better deal than Toyota does. Ford has more standard features and costs less. But I test drove a Ranger and didn't like it as much as the Tacoma. I liked the stiffer suspension and I liked the 5-speed manual which I could not find on the Ford 4.0L back in 1998. I think the Tacoma looks better than the Ranger does too; but that does not mean I don't think the Ranger is a nice looking truck.

    BTW, I just got back from the Outer Banks and spent a good portion of my time drivng on the beaches down there. This wasn't "serious" offroading, I know, but it was still fun going where most other vehicles can't and being all alone on the beach. My truck handled great once again and I'll be looking forward to going down there again in another few months to do it again.

    Vince, I'm curious. You mentioned a few posts back that you felt the Tacoma had a SLIGHT advantage over the Ranger. I'm curious to know where you feel that the Tacoma has the edge. I'm not looking to smear you with your own answer, I'm just curious because, well, you're constantly praising the Ranger and bashing Tacoma owners (which is cool), yet you HAVE admitted that the Tacoma has a SLIGHT advantage over the Ranger.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    I can't argue that you can get more options on the Ranger for less money. As for the Kings, I wouldn't say that Colorado humiliated them. You guys had to go to game seven and that was the only game that wasn't close in the whole series. You're having less trouble with the Blues, and I hope that you sweep them, as that indicates that the Kings are a better team than most. Also having an X-King, Blake, was probably the only reason that you were barely able to take us. Ha!
  • navy4navy4 Member Posts: 44
    Just a question, "Does your employer have a mandatory drug testing policy?"

    If not, they should. And you should be sharing the stuff that makes you think so highly of the Kings. The best team won the series and will hopefully win the Cup next month.

    GO AVS!!!!!!

    P.S. The only reason you did so well in the season was an ex-Av, Adam Deadmarsh. I wish we could have him back.
  • eagle63eagle63 Member Posts: 599
    I thought it was: First On Race Day....
  • ebbgreatdaneebbgreatdane Member Posts: 278
    Question for the Ford folks... Are they just as vague as the Toyota schmos as to when you're truck will arrive...sheez.

    I'm dyin' here. The 4X4 with the yamaha in the back will be the first thing I test!
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    Somehow I doubt that you were complaing much when Blake was scoring all of those goals for the Avs. I'll agree that Deadmarsh did a lot for the Kings in the playoffs, however, most of the credit in almost knocking you guys out of the playoffs has to go to the Kings goalie. Since you did have a lucky day, squeeking by and barely beating the Kings, I'll go along with you and say go Avs!!!! They deserve the cup.
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    May 2001 issue of fourwheeler-

    Toyota Tacoma wins offroad comparison with Hummer, Range Rover, and Jeep wrangler

    2001 Pickup of the year - Tacoma

    1998 Tacoma head to head comparison with Ranger -
    www.fourwheeler.com - Tacoma wins by a unanimous decison.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    and you deserve and answer in kind.
    I cannot dispute the Tacoma has a better reliability history than the Ranger. Anywhere I go the Toyota rates higher. If I were to claim the Ranger as being the more reliable I would be laughed out of this room. My whole point is this edge is not as large as some Toyota owners wish and want others to believe. If you surf the net the RAnger rates quiet well in reliability, usually only a few points or 1/2 star less than the Tacoma. Another point is their is a considerable price difference when you match these trucks option for option.. As someone has said, Ford can make more trucks than Toyota, therefore has passed the savings onto the consumer. Why are Toyota's profits out of this world? Because the dealers don't deal....
    Performance wise the Ranger has now taken the golden ring from Tacoma. Its a sigh of relief to finally see the SOHC 4.0 available in the Ranger. As far as offroading, the Toyota doesn't offer some magic potion that gets you up that hill or cross that gully any better than a RAnger.....
    I don't Tacoma bash either. If you read my posts I have NEVER said the Tacoma was a "piece of junk" or "garbage" or incapable. These Trucks are at the top of the compact truck food chain. In my opinion the Ranger is the better value..
  • ebbgreatdaneebbgreatdane Member Posts: 278
    But you didn't bash on Spoog...?

    Are you feeling ok?
  • indacurl2kindacurl2k Member Posts: 54
    You know what, I have to agree with you. I never saw the Tacoma as having any real MAJOR advantage over the Ranger. It's a little more reliable and that's about it.

    As for the image thing, I believe that some Toyota owners maintain such an image, but I am not one of those people. At least I don't think I am. I also happen to agree with you on the TRD issue. I think most people who optioned for this got duped. I also think that most Tacoma 4x4's on dealer lots have this option and that is why people bought it. It really isn't practical 99.9999% of the time. I'm sure someone out there will diasagree and if they do, they're not considering the bigger picture which is how 99.9999% of Tacoma owners are using their trucks. Unless you're doing some serious offroading I can't see the need for the locker. When the Toyota dealer had me in the "box," they pushed the TRD hard; really hard. But I didn't bite; I adamantly refused. Why Toyota put a locker on the PreRunner without 4wd is beyond me. My friend has a TRD 4x4 and he has yet to use the locker and he admits he probably never will. He took his TRD stickers off the truck because he didn't like them which I think is funny. I always bust his balls about the locker and ask him if he's used it yet.

    I think the Ranger and Tacoma are the nicest compact pickups around. Of the two, the Ranger is definitely the better value. I have not test driven the Ford SOHC 4.0 and probably won't until I'm ready for a new truck. My Tacoma runs very well and other than the one problem with the radiator, it's been trouble free. Sure I paid more for it than I could have for a comparably equipped Ranger. I found everything I was looking for in the Tacoma and the Ranger came in a hair short. I've always maintained that the Ranger is a good truck and every bit as good as the Tacoma.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    Well it took 60, count em, 60 shots on goal for the Blues to win last night in double OT. Unheard of in the NHL, 60 shots. . .And the Avs could, in my opinion, should have won last night on a couple of very easy missed shots. . .

    Avs were just playin with the Kings, wanted to win at home. . .

    Yes Blake has been a great addition. . .

    In regard to Tacoma vs Ranger, there are things to like about both. How about this. . .:

    Ranger:
    Great quality, get a lot for the money, holds it's own off-road, better ride on road, great truck for budget minded, large amount of after market options to improve off-road performance, large number of trim lines.

    Tacoma:
    Toyota quality a legend, great v6 engine, outstanding off-road performance, bland when not in 4X4 trim, offers some 4X4 options normally after market, ok but stiff on road ride.

    Most off-roaders will tell you, and here is where Ranger in general has an edge:

    "An off-road vehicle is built, not bought."
  • midnight_stangmidnight_stang Member Posts: 862
    Spoog--->Hey buddy, you sound like a broken record. Even Tibetan monks change their mantras.
    Notice that the Ranger and F-150 were not involved in the may 2001 offroad comparison.
    Also some may have noticed the star rating given by edmund's readers. Looks like the average rating on "Consumer Ratings and Comments" for the 2001 Ranger are 5 out of 5. For Tacoma, they have an average of 4 out of 5. Tacomaboy gave his rating 5 stars in the 2001 review, even though he drives a 1996. So some Tacoma owners aren't 100% happy, while Rangers owners seem to be 100% satisified.
    Click on the "Reviews and Info" tab under either truck.

    Great Dane--->Patience grasshopper... It should be worth the wait... :) How long has it been? I beleive a local Ford dealer quoted 4-8 weeks. But that is if I ordered off invoice, as in I will have the Ranger built to my exact specifications and option list. If they can locate one matching your wants/needs it's only the amount of time to get it shipped. But I prefer to wait for exactly what I want with the minimum of miles, etc. Good luck.

    cpousnr-->I think the best v6 should go to the Ford, with it's 4.0l sohc. Safety goes to the Ranger as well with standard 4 wheel ABS, safety belt pretensioners, 2nd gen air bags, and rigid frame.
  • rmacias_rmacias_ Member Posts: 37
    I think no one in here can truly give a valid opinion unless they have owned and driven both Trucks extensively. Anyone who states that their Truck is better than the other without actually having the experience of owning both Trucks is completely biased.

    People fear what they don't know and if you don't know you can't judge.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    I own both but I'm sure that some still don't like my opinion. It just depends on what's important to you.

    indacurl2k- I guess that I'm one of the strange ones that based my opinion on getting the TRD package partly because the stiff ride. I like it that way on the highway too because it improved the handling ability quite a bit over the non-TRD. So in my case I enjoy the TRD package 100% of the time. As for the locker, I may never need it for what I use the truck for, but its nice to know that it's there if I need it. With the TRD I'm more apt to go to areas I might not otherwise.

    CP - I have to agree with you that Colorado should have won. They led most of the game and somehow I wouldn't be surprised if that's the last game the Blues win this year.
  • ebbgreatdaneebbgreatdane Member Posts: 278
    Midnight -
    "Patience...for the Jedi it is time to eat as well," but screw that I want my truck! LOL After two weeks of wheeling and dealing, we've been waiting for 4 weeks (6 weeks total). I think I just need to let it go and, "if they build it, it will come..."

    Marcias -
    You make a good point but if you like your truck you like your truck. Why not brag a just a little or in Spoog's case make the same point over and over and over again.

    I'm wondering if the Ranger owners here have any any major gripes about their Rangers? I have a few about Toyota but I'm not willing to get bashed on first. Heh heh.

    However, if you read some of my previous posts in here you'll see I too am getting the TRD package but am not entirely happy about it. I wanted the wheels, tires and Bilsteins, but it doesn't make sense to just get the aluminum wheels and tires upgrade and buy the shocks aftermarket (about $120 a pop X 4) Vs. getting the TRD package. I'll probably never use the Locker unless I'm pulling a boat out of the water. Is it just me or does the sticker spell T'u'RD?

    LOL

    John
  • rmacias_rmacias_ Member Posts: 37
    This last weekend I ventured off the payment to test my TRD Locker. There is an ORV park about 10
    miles from my house. The area is called "Red Sands" and offers mild 4-wheel trails. Most of the trails are designed something similar to a Baja 500 course.

    One of the first observations I noticed about engaging the 4X4 system was how quiet it was. My
    Ranger always sounded like I was running a Super-charger under the hood while engaged.

    I ran several of the trails with 4-hi engaged and
    noticed that a fair amount of acceleration was required to get through some of the deep red sand.

    Next I engaged the Locker in 4-low and ran the same trails again. This time I was able to ease along at my own desired speed without over accelerating to negotiate the next obstacle. The complete 4X4 system felt completely solid and reliable. Also, contrary to common belief you can
    run your Tacoma at speeds above 8mph while in 4-low and the Locker engaged. (Vince are you listening) The locker does not automatically disengage above the 8mph speed. Actually, I reached speeds of about 35-40 mph and the locker was still engaged. I know for a fact that the locker was still engaged because of the noticeable difference in turning radius. But once you learn how to compensate for it you can maneuver the Truck with ease.

    I'm glad I chose the TRD option it was fun and enjoyable, even if you're not the hardcore 4X4 fanatic.

    Loyal TRD Fan
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    \\Spoog--->Hey buddy, you sound like a broken record. Even Tibetan monks change their mantras.
    Notice that the Ranger and F-150 were not involved in the may 2001 offroad comparison. \\

    They were in the running. Four wheeler looked at every 4x4 before doing the Ultimate 4x4 test for the May issue of Fourwheeler 2001.

    Sorry man. Do you REALLY think a ford f150 or a ranger is going to be chosen aming the ranks of wrangler, range rover, hummer, and tacoma? lol!!

    No way. If you read the article, you will see that they looked at all 4x4's out there, and chose those 4.

    Ford STINKS offroad, their trucks have highway suspensions. Maybe you should read the Edmunds.com SUV comparions about how weak and rattly the Expedition was. They voted it "most likely to break while offroad", nad then began to rip ford for selling a vehicle that is wishy washy, trying to be all things to all people, and ending up not doing any one thing very well.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    you drove 35-40MPH in 4LOW!!??? Please, no way no how, what the heck kind of gearing do you have?? There is no way you drove your truck in 4low at speeds of 35-40MPH. I have a friend who has a TRD and I know for a fact YOU CAN'T.
    Check your owners manual. Toyota has a whole bunch of disclaimers about the locker.. MPH and all....
    The TRD package is a good one, I have never said it wasn't. What I keep saying is its worthless to over 90 percent of truck owners. The locker only engages in 4low. Did you try to take some nice sharp turns? Believe me, you would know if you did.., Quite an expensive package for a set of Bilstein shocks, springs (Toyotas "tuned" suspension") and a locker that you may use 2 percent of your total driving time...
    Gas prices on the way up in the NW. They are saying we can see 2.25 - 2.50 by August!....
  • eddiejoneseddiejones Member Posts: 1
    I don't own either vehicle, so I will not compare. However, I will say that it is a bloody shame that more manufacturers don't offer a manually activated locker. It is truly the best of all worlds. All these purported "limited slip" differentials are useless. The internal clutches wear out almost immediately I have experienced them in both a Dodge Ram and a Ford Explorer. Not everyone is keen on ripping out the factory diff for an after market job. Tires, shocks and stickers, sure... easy after market additions. No idea if the TRD springs are really different, so I won't go there. I have to commend Toyota for offering a usable feature. I have been in plenty of situations in the Explorer where I would have loved one. Sure beats getting towed out of a mess. Looks like Ford has improved quality too. Thank Goodness. It was almost criminal what I have had to put into my Explorer to keep it running.

    Eddie
  • rmacias_rmacias_ Member Posts: 37
    Vince,
    What year is your friend's Tacoma? Obviously your friend has never pushed his truck to the max. Though I would not recommend driving your Truck in 4-low at those speeds frequently, it is possible. Anything is possible, if you step out of your little box. (Vince)
  • midnight_stangmidnight_stang Member Posts: 862
    Spoog when I originally checked that site you are so fond of, I saw some type of pick up or 4x4 test in which there were NO trucks from Ford. When in fact the article you keep posting is not available online. Maybe you should type it up instead of just posting the one-liner.

    Ford can definately hold it's own off-road, and if you think about it, what form of ground do you travel on mostly? If you commute across a mud-hole, or think people have 'purty mouths' then you will need a truck ready to handle 15% grades, and fanatical reticulation all the time. I think it was cpounsor that said it best, in factory form Tacoma has an offroad advantage, but you can still kick some mud in a Ford 4x4. But if you really want to do some serious off-roading, it's time to modify, and build up the truck. Also, show me a truck that has the best of both worlds in off-road capability and highway manners. You can't there is obviously a trade off in having 35" tires and a 6" lift.

    People buying expeditions for offroad? Why not a Navigator and Excursion while we are at it? These kinds of SUV's aren't really for racing to Pike's peak or going through a mud bog. They are glorified minivans, or troop transports with a transfer case when they want to go camping in the woods, and not worry about getting stuck in a muddy road/field.

    So the majority of the people out there, myself included, want a truck to drive 5-10 miles to work, occasional camping or travelling, and ability to haul or tow occasionally. Hence compact truck, not fullsize. My truck will spend 95% of the time on cemented roads. I'm getting a 4.0l 4x2 regular cab in the next 12-16 months, so why should I listen to a fourwheeler magazine, and you saying that Ford stinks off road? When in reality the fourwheeler magazine says the following about the 2000 4.0l 4x4 supercab 2dr:

    "The judges warmed up to the Ranger fairly quickly. It didn't take top honors in any of the six categories, but it placed either second or third in four of them. The truck simply does everything well. " and "These two [Ford and Mazda] trucks were everyone's pick for driver comfort, and we'd gladly hop in one for a cross-country jaunt or for daily commuting." "The truck fared pretty well off-road, with plenty of power and sufficient suspension travel. At speeds the truck handled well, although a few drivers experienced understeer on fire roads"

    So Spoog, if you take that magazine as gospel, look at what else it has to say. 4 door is standard on 4x4 XLT supercabs now, and the 4.0l went from pushrod 158hp to SOHC 207HP! Plus all the other refinements found in 2001.
  • jholcjholc Member Posts: 25
    I know a guy with a Tacoma who thought he could only use 1st gear in 4 low. He was shocked when I told him I use any and all 5 gears and reverse in 4 low. Not too often but I have been on trails where I got tired of popping into and out of low range. Many times i've been cruising along a trail in 5th gear at maybe 20 mph in low range. My 97 doesn't have a locker but I'm looking to add an aftermarket Powertrax LockRight. Totally automatic and engages whenever wheels are straight and disengages when turning. Talked to one guy with it and says it's the best off-road improvement he's made to the truck.

    Have to admit, I still have not come to a point where I've needed it yet-especially with the BFG's. With those tires, I was crawling over some things in 2wd that I needed 4wd with the stock tires.
  • sasquatch_2000sasquatch_2000 Member Posts: 800
    I live in New England (MA) and we get big snow maybe 12 times a year more than 10 inches. I would like a truck for utility purposes, but don't think I need 4X4. I do light off roading, and am wondering if the Ranger or Tacoma can be had with a positraction locking rear differential. If it doesn't come as an option, can it be added later, and if so, how much and what brand (Ford, Toyota?) and how big a job? Thanks in advance.
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    Haven't you figured it out yet? It's no use trying to converse with spoog at all. He hasn't replied to a direct question in over a year.

    I find it ironic that he lives in Chicagoland (as do I) and never goes off pavement all the while promoting the "vast superiority" of the Tacoma over everything else ever made by man or alien on the trails.

    Ever notice how everything is a quote from some dated magazine article, never a single itsy, bitsy shread of personal experience.

    Besides steelman and spoog, all of the Taco guys on this board seem pretty reasonable, tho.
  • ebbgreatdaneebbgreatdane Member Posts: 278
    Vince -
    You certainly must engage the locker at 5 mph (per the Tacoma manual) or lower but you certainly are not limited to any speed restrictions after it is engaged other than the red line speed rating of the motor and/or the turn radius problems when on dry pavement. The 4lo drive ratio is 2.57:1 but there is no reason you can't achieve 35-40 mph in 4lo in 5th gear (5spd manual).

    Eddie-
    I guess I kind of see your point regarding the Locker but a selectable Limited Slip is more pratical. A locker is good for when you in the sticks, sands, or tryin to get the boat out of the water.

    Midnight-
    LOL. What's wrong with 4X4-ing in a 6000 pound vehicle for non-military applications? I never saw the Dad from the Brady Bunch ever say, "I saw this in a movie once..." as he veered off of the road into a wooded valley to 4X4 across the mud pits.

    sasquatch-
    Tacoma with the available TRD package comes with a rear differential locker. However a limited slip differential is not available. What's the difference (or you may know already)?

    A limiited slip diff evenly distributes power between the wheels at the rear in the event that one tire loses traction. Manueverability is reduced but traction is increased.

    A locking rear diff gives each wheel 50% power. The benefit is that there is little or no chance that you'll be stuck spinning your wheels in the sticks. The bad part is when you make any serious turns, your inside turning radius is smaller than the outside however both wheels want to turn identically. If you try this on pavement at any kind of real speed, your backend will be in front of your front end after a lot of complaining from your rearend.

    John
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    in 4low his TRD cannot go 35-40MPH, unless he wants to blow his engine/transmission. You guys don't have a clue as to what you are talking about. Your RPM's must be out of this world if you are in 4low going 35-40mph. Take a look at your manual again.. your also not telling the whole truth about what Toyota recommends....
    Here we are again talking about locking rearends. First, a locker is better than a limited slip for offroading, but a limites slip is better than an open axle. There are some limits as to when and how a locker is supposed to be used. Ever try to take a sharp turn with your locker engaged? There are speed limits also. The rebuild of a clutch type limited slip is also under $200 dollars for us do it yourselfers. How much does it cost to rebuild a locker? I can tell you, about 4x that of a limited slip. LImited slips are much more functional for the everyday user. How often do you go offroad? maybe 10 percent of your total driving time? Do you stay in 4low the whole time offroading, Nope. Is your locker engaged the whole time offroading, nope. Before you answer yes, you must not take any sharp turns where you offroad.. I am talking the cost vs the use of this option for the average truck user. For over 90 percent of those who buy trucks.. Lockers are useless....
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    \\All these purported "limited slip" differentials are useless. The internal clutches wear out almost immediately\\

    In the Four Wheeler May 2001 Ultimate 4x4 contest, they praised the TRD Tacoma for not having LSD or any other "gimmick".
  • rickc5rickc5 Member Posts: 378
    Copying copyrighted material and posting it is AGAINST the rules imposed on these forums by Edmunds. You can be permanently kicked off the board for doing it. Check out the rules yourself.

    How about linking to these wonderful, worn-out tidbits you post.
  • rickc5rickc5 Member Posts: 378
    We bought our Expedition primarily for hauling our junk and family around. But, since it IS a 4x4, I wanted to see how it performed off-road. Where better to do that than in Moab. Aside from almost getting stuck in some SERIOUS mud, it performed amazingly well, although on trails that were rated "easy". Its size is a detriment, but not as much as I had feared. The flip side is that it very comfortable off-road. Why not test the capabilities of one's vehicle?
  • barlitzbarlitz Member Posts: 752
    Don't put anything into what spoog says or posts,a lot of us have been waiting well over a year for spoog to post a picture of his fictional truck,I've even got a cheap digital camera I'll fedex him that he can keep if he'll photo his truck with it and post it online,just finished reading about the 2002 ranger thunderbolt,baby brother of the Lightning.It is a go and will be availible soon.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    called the Adrenalin? Thunderbolt? Is it going to have the 3.9 V8 in it the Lincoln LS has??? Or are they going with a tuned SOHC 4.0?
    I have been on this board for almost 2 years!! and have yet to see one pic from spoog. He claims to own a TRD with a supercharger yet has made so many mistakes on specs for Tacoma's and offroading advice... ????
    I sure wish I could go back and get his first posts here at Edmunds. These prove he does not own a TRD let alone a supercharged TRD...
  • smc13smc13 Member Posts: 52
    I've been deciding which compact truck I wanted to buy for a few months. I was in the market for a 2-dr extended cab 4x4 with the best engine of whatever manufacturer. I immediately discounted any GM model because everything I read says that they break down a lot. I didn't look at the dakota because I owned a dodge and while it didn't have any major problems (I drove it 184,000 miles and no transmission or engine problems), little things kept breaking. (my service engine soon light started coming on after my warranty ended, the turn signal wouldn't turn off after I made a turn. While I would have liked to test drive a Nissan with a supercharger I couldn't find a 2-dr with automatic transmission (I live in the baltimore washington area and I don't feel like learning to drive a stick while driving around both beltways in rush hour). The Mazda requires that you get a 4-dr if you want the 4.0 liter so bye, bye mazda. That left me with the Ranger and the Tacoma.

    I was looking for the top of the line models and both trucks MSRPs are in the $25,000 - $26,000 range (the tacoma becomes more epensive than the ranger if you want ABS and a security system). So I didn't see a huge price differance between the two.

    I test drove the ranger and had a fun test drive. The sales person was cool and let me drive it where ever I wanted. I even made a wrong turn and got us lost briefly but he didn't care. Unfortunetely the Ranger wasn't that good. I've read that the ranger was supposed to have a better on road ride than the tacoma, but I didn't like the feel at all. The engine wasn't bad but it wasn't awe inspiring either. the seats weren't comfortable and it seemed that ranger had a huge blind spot on the left hand side making it harder to merge with traffic than I am used to. The ranger wasn't awfull, it just wasn't good either.

    So I test drove the tacoma. From what I have read it is supposed to have uncomfortable seats, poor on road handling, but great reliability. Well, I thought the bucket seats were better than the rangers and I thought the handling on the tacoma was better. Overall, the Tacoma just seemed better to drive. So I bought one.

    Now, the tacoma isn't without its problems. I wanted one with an abs and you can't find one. I had a few dealerships looking and finally one dealership was able to locate one for me. I don't understand ABS isn't standard like it is on all other trucks. Also I couldn't find an xtracab v6 4wd without the TRD package. I don't have any major plans to go offroading so I really don't need the trd package, but was "forced" to buy it anyway. Who knows, maybe I will go offroading just to see how well the trd package works.

    Anyway, Since I reading this message board for a while I figured I would contribute my opinion to it.

    Steve Cohen
  • barlitzbarlitz Member Posts: 752
    I read about the thunderbolt over at blueovalnews.com there is even a photo of it.
  • cthompson21cthompson21 Member Posts: 1,102
    The Thunderbolt is a total bust. It's going to be made by SLP (an aftermarket tuner), so who knows about the warranty. It consists of primarily a $1500 body package that looks absolutely gruesome. The "performance" part of the package is a 15hp cat-back exhaust. Wooohooo...

    Can't anyone make an AWD/4WD performance truck that costs around 20 grand???
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    Ford was coming out with a V8 Ranger in 2002 called the Adrenalin. It was rumored to have a 3.9 V8 engine (Possibly the same engine in the Lincoln LS). It was going to be built by SVT and backed by Ford with warranties... Who knows anymore??? Heck even a SOHC 4.0 Ranger 5spd in a 2WD with a limited slip diff and some suspension mods, along with nice ground affects and paint would do the trick! Are you listening Ford???
  • ebbgreatdaneebbgreatdane Member Posts: 278
    Totally hear you about the TRD package "absolute" availablity and the endangered ABS system to be found only on the most rare of Tacos. We are still waiting for ours due in any day now. Fortunately we were able to get one with ABS. Unfortunately, we were railroaded into the same TRD circle (e.g., go for any wheel up grade Vs. the TRD package as required by SR5 and you'll get your truck when your clothes are no longer in style).

    Congrats. I hope you'll post again and let us know how your truck is doing.

    John
  • midnight_stangmidnight_stang Member Posts: 862
    cthompson->Yeah, spoog and that stupid magazine. He must have it framed over the fireplace. I'm sure I could buy a competing 4x4 magazine and talk to him at his own level, but I won't.

    GreatDate--->Nothing wrong with 4x4ing in a large SUV. I was just trying to let spoog know that if you want a vehicle for that offroading, you can buy one with better ability to do so. Also if the ultimate offroad vehicle was desired, like cpounsor said, you really need to modify the heck out of it. Like once I saw a picture on the internet of a '67 or '68 mustang fastback body sitting on a F-250 frame. Looked crazy, but also looked like it could handle the worst of boulders with several feet of ground clerance.

    spoog--->Why are you talking Explorers here? And as far as talking smack, I love to see your "supercharged TRD" get eaten alive by a 4.0l sohc, naturally aspired Ranger. Oh yeah, because your serpentine belt whines, doesn't mean you have a supercharger... :)

    rickc5--->I didn't mean to knock the Expeditions, just was trying to let spoog know (my bad) that nobody lives with their car/truck off-road 100% of the time. I just think people who buy those kind of SUV's are sold more on the size and comfort, and the 4x4 capability is a bonus.
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.