Are you being sarcastic? The ones I've talked to (well, a coupla years back by now) seemed reasonable. You can't get them down as close to dealer cost as with a Ranger, but they didn't seem to try and pull crap like wilcox mentioned.
I've found that Ford sales departments are generally pretty good. Maybe the fact that there's usually one about 5mins away that has something to do with it. I've heard thousands of horror stories about the service departments, though. But, I can't rate the one I've gone to on a couple of occasions anything other than very good to excellent. Maybe I've just been lucky... I guess it must be an either or thing because their sales staff are a bunch of a$$holes.
No I am not being sarcastic, I have heard many bad experiences. I went to about 5 dealerships before I went back to a very small one in the town I went to school in where I got my 88 serviced. Maybe its the "Young and Dumb" salesforce in the city compared to the older guys I talked to in the small town, where the owner comes out to talk to all customers at some point or another.
Hey CP! not much has changed in here. I'm about to turn 35K to! I am still waiting for the squeaks, rattles and problems all these Toyota boys preach that Rangers will have. Went up to Timberline lodge this weekend to eat dinner and took the Ranger, no chains either. Ranger made it up just fine in 4high. Took some offshoot roads for fun, kids liked it. Seeing quite a few new 2001 Rangers on the road. Seems I see more 2001 Rangers than 2001 Tacoma's. I think Toyota is going to loose its styling edge with that butt ugly grill.! I still feel Toyota survives just on this crap of being the better 4x4. Heck, I can't even get my friend with the TRD to go roadin!! I give him crap on not wanting to dent or scratch his Toy truck. Can't wait to see the new offroad pkg offered by Ford. I have a contact at a rather large Ford dealership who is going to call me when one comes in.
I put the kids in front with me. The jumpers I only use for grocery store jaunts. Yes, I agree the seats are not safe. My wife has already mentioned once or twice the Ranger is not a "family friendly vehicle". So, I believe my days of offroading fun are numbered. She wants a mini-suv in the family. I can't argue too much either. I have been very busy the last 6-9 months with my kids soccer, swimming, basketball, dancing and so on. This has put a squeeze on my being able to go into the Cascades as much as I would like. I have only made it up there about 4 times in the last month. And a mini-suv will get me into the fishing areas I like, just can't go onto the harder trails.. Sigh....
Vince, say it ain't so!!! You love off-roading too much to go that route. If you must eventually get rid of the Ranger and get an SUV, how about a compromise? What about the venerable Jeep Cherokee? More family-friendly, not over-priced, good off-roader. You'll have the best of both worlds...
If you have a Ranger supercab and are looking to upgrade to an SUV type vehicle you should look at the Sport Trac,it is the same length as your ranger and just as capable. I was looking at one the other day and they are niceand with the exception of the body the rest of the truck is identicle to the ex-cab ranger,it even has the 205hp 4.0l.
\\So, I believe my days of offroading fun are numbered. \\
Offroading isn't well groomed forest roads.....
\\ She wants a mini-suv in the family. I can't argue too much either. I have been very busy the last 6-9 months with my kids soccer, swimming, basketball, dancing and so on. This has put a squeeze on my being able to go into the Cascades as much as I would like. I have only made it up there about 4 times in the last month. And a mini-suv will get me into the fishing areas I like, just can't go onto the harder trails.. Sigh....\\
The mini SUV won't be a downgrade at all from the Ranger in 4x4 use. The Ranger was never designed for offroad use. Your just as well off getting that new Ford Escape, which is pretty sharp looking. Same ground clearance as the Ranger, and you still get your limited slip.
priorities....same reason I don't drive what you do. In an accident, well you know your chances of survival when you bought that tin can now don't you.
does the ford escape have the same ground clearance as a ranger with the new off-road package? the same shocks? how about tires? breakover/departure angles? oh yeah, but good point though....
Spoog has no idea of how to even drive a 4x4. He would rather go over an object with his ground clearance rather than use his tires to crawl over it@! LOL!. He dreams of a 4x4 Tacoma, probably has posters on his room wall.. He keeps claiming Rangers can't 4x4, yet many of us prove him wrong over and over and over..... I don't know whats going to happen. I enjoy my Ranger, enjoy the outdoors. I don't plan on making any type of move until next fall anyway. It has come down to whats practical though for the family. So spoog, I have plenty of play time left. Time up in the Cascade range of Oregon /Washington. Doing things in a 4x4 Ranger you only dream of...boy.
Post #62 is a typical spoog post. It seems spoog can't accept the fact that people buy trucks for a variety of purposes. While the Tacoma "may" have an edge over the Ranger for four-wheeling, IMHO, the Tacoma doesn't equal the Ranger in overall flexibility. Its sort of "purpose-built", which might be fine if all you do is 4-wheel. Most of us use our trucks as daily transportation, where the Tacoma takes a back seat to the Ranger.
Right, and another "I pulled a Ranger out story" garbage... A newbee to the room, welcome jray18. How can I burst your "Tacoma is god" bubble today? I know the open axle gets you Toyota boys going, along with the HP/Torque curve issue, and crashtest issue, along with your cheap and badly laid out interior... LOL! along with the premium price you boys paid for a set of 4 Bilstein shocks and springs, a locker you will maybe use 2% of your total driving time, and a sticker that says "TRD Toyota racing development" ooooh cool... Enjoy the sticker...
Here is a COMPLETE list of the TSB's, Defect Investigations, and Safety Recalls for the Toyota pickup, Chevy s-10, Ford Ranger, and Dodge Dakota from the years 1989-2000. Enjoy.
Defect Investigations 1989-2000
Ford Ranger - 20
Dodge Dakota- 14
Chevy S10 - 51
Toyota Tacoma - 2
Safety Recalls 1989-2000
Ford Ranger- 32
Dodge Dakota - 28
Chevyy S10 - 47
Toyota Tacoma - 6
Technical Service Bulletins 1989-2000
Ford Ranger -2,279(yes, 2,279)
Dodge Dakota- 940
Chevy S10 -448
Toyota Tacoma - 150
-------
So there you have it. All data is factual, and very telling. This is NOT "subjective".
A trucks reliability and build quality is NOT "subjective".
Not all trucks are built the same, as you can plainly see.
At the risk of repeating myself, but from my personal ownership of two Tacomas vs. many rides in friend's Rangers, here's why I feel the Ranger is a better daily driver than a Tacoma:
Better seats
Better ride over rough pavement; less harsh
Less noise, especially wind/road noise
Better sound system
Better ergonomics; the Tacoma has an AWFUL steering wheel; the Ranger has more leg room
So now you can repeat yourself and once again tell me how you love your Tacoma and disagree with my opinion. OK, fire away.
this forum is great! ive been missing out. could someone tell me about the crashtest data. i read it somewhere in these posts but dont know what it is referring to. spoog, interesting data on TSB. however, reasearch and data collection never prove anything. they merely suggest a possibility. statistical relevance is also an issue. there seems to be no information regarding the statistical implications of that data. it is my opinion that the percieved quality between foriegn and domestic cars/trucks is GREATLY exaggerated. supposedly, companies like ford are only after the bottom line, the heck with quality. yet, japanese companies care only about quality. right! every company is out to suck the last dollar out form under us. it just so happens, people are suckered into paying a premium for japanese vehicles. granted, i would never buy a chevy but you know what im saying. personally, i dont understand, if someone is going to have a 4x4 for 4x4 purposes, why wouldnt someone buy a really old jeep, truck, whatever? whats the deal with buying BRAND SPANKING NEW vehicles so you can pretend you are rugged and live in the woods anyway? do you like throwing away thousands of dollars? thats what happens when you buy a new truck. come on! the rigs in the 4x4 mags are all old beat up peices of modified crap and they seem to be doing just fine.
just for the record, what IS the best off-road vehicle? i noticed that someone stated that a ranger isnt meant for serious offroading. if that is true whats the point? wouldnt that mean that ALL pickups arent meant for offroading? if so, wouldnt a better choice be something like a subaru? a subaru is a "serious" off road machine considering its vast experience in winning rallys. are there various degrees of offroading? where do the ranger and tacoma fit? im serious! all things considered, what do those of you with experience believe to be the most sensible offroad vehicle? please dont tell me its a brand new $23 thousand dollar pick up.
one more thought on the reliabilty factor: lets assume that the majority of reliabilty arguments stem from widely-available publications such as consumer reports and other car/truck review mags. ive noticed that the majority of these reports are based on owner complaints. i am uncertain as to whether these are calls, letters, census, repair receipts or what have you. itn doesnt really matter. what does matter is that the method used for reliabilty forecasts are unreliable. ive never seen any actual research studies (which would constitute a repeatable, reliable, and valid source of info) that deal with the vague concept of reliability. my point is that when we read consumer magazines and a toyota has a red circle while a ford has a white one, all that can mean and still be valid is that joe bob and all his friends reported on their tacoma while bobby joe and his buddies didnt say a word about their ranger, even though theyve put 700,000 miles on them. do you see what im saying? the method of reliabilty forecast is invalid because its a FORECAST and its not statistically relevant. even if it was, STATISTICS DONT PROVE ANYTHING. thanks for reading....
\\just for the record, what IS the best off-road vehicle?\\
Production? Specialty?
The basic Jeep is the best stock production offroader, followed by the Toyota LandCruiser and Toyota Tacoma.
\\i noticed that someone stated that a ranger isnt meant for serious offroading.\\
This is correct. Ford does not build their trucks with even a HINT of offroad philosophy. They build their trucks to haul, tow , and be comfortable on the highway. They do this job well.
\\ if that is true whats the point? wouldnt that mean that ALL pickups arent meant for offroading?\\
No. Pickup trucks are not all cut from the same cloth......
\\ if so, wouldnt a better choice be something like a subaru? a subaru is a "serious" off road machine considering its vast experience in winning rallys. are there various degrees of offroading? where do the ranger and tacoma fit? im serious! all things considered, what do those of you with experience believe to be the most sensible offroad vehicle? please dont tell me its a brand new $23 thousand dollar pick up.\\
The most sensible offroad vehicle? A used Cj 7 with around 6 grand of work to it.
But this is NOT a reliable vehicle. This is why Toyota has earned such a great world wide offroading reputation:
Not only do they make good offroading trucks, they can take the abuse as well. Thats a pretty rare thing.
The following segments are from a head to head comparison in 4wheeler.com: WINNER: TOYOTA TACOMA TRD
Although the compact Tacoma XtraCab itself is not completely new, the Toyota Racing Development (TRD) suspension and locking rear differential package is. The TRD Off-Road Package offers oversized fender flares, alloy wheels, 31-inch tires, Bilstein shocks, slightly softer spring rates, and an electromechanical, button-actuated rear locking differential, all for $1,690.
Our Surfside Green test unit came with the 3.4-liter, dual-overhead cam, 24-valve engine and five-speed manual transmission. The Tacoma came factory-equipped with the lowest axle gears of the test: 4.10:1. It was this combination of excellent gearing (First gear for the factory five-speed is 3.83:1) that made testers comment about how readily the Tacoma jumped off the line. In fact, during track testing, the Tacoma was substantially faster than the others, both loaded and unloaded (see page 30). Tract ion came courtesy of a more aggressive tread in the 31x10.50 Goodyear Wrangler three-stage GSA. We found it supplied surprisingly good cornering power on pavement, with plenty of potential for aired-down trail running. As well as the Tacoma performed on the track, it was on the trail where the premium import seemed most comfortable. Best-in-class ground clearance, the most aggressive tread of the bunch, and a crawl ratio of better than 40:1 made the Tacoma everyone' s choice for hill climbs and steep backside descents. Even our resident auto-tranny diehards had to admit that the lively throttle response, sure-grip clutch, and built-to-work gearing meshed together as well as any championship-caliber team. In each perf ormance-related category of our test, the Toyota won.
It's not often that our collection of testers agree on anything (in fact, never), but this year's Pickup Truck of the Year was a unanimous decision. Praises relating to the TRD suspension mentioned its ability to control rutted, seriously choppy terra in better than any other vehicle we'd driven. One tester went so far as to note that during a few moments of an effortless dry-wash run, it seemed the spirit of Ivan Stewart had taken over his body. This is a truck that can go slow or go fast, on pavement or off.
Ultimately, in addition to a strong engine, good tires, and supremely tuned suspension, the clutch defeat switch (the only one in a truck sold in the US.), lever-operated transfer case, and pushbutton locking rear differential were the icing on a toug h-truck cake. Although you have to pay a premium for a premium package, the TRD Tacoma, dollar for dollar, is the best on- and off-highway compact package (maybe of any truck) we've seen. This truck has features the others just don't offer, and they all w ork. And that's why it's our 1998 Pickup Truck of the Year.
Following in the footsteps of its close relative, the '98 Ranger adopted many of the mechanical modifications incorporated into the Explorer two years earlier. Among the biggest changes include an entirely new double A-arm front suspension with light-duty torsion bars. The new IFS, combined with an all-new rack-and-pinion steering setup (which offers its own steering fluid cooler), won high praises from our testers over our 800-mile test. Specifically, the Ranger scor ed well in Highway Performance categories that centered around maneuverability and long-distance cruising. Testers noted the new steering proved especially quick to react in tight-chicane situations. No doubt about it: This new Ranger out-handles, out-ste ers and out-corners any Ranger before. By a mile.
We would characterize the drivetrain, specifically the transmission, as biased for highway performance as well. All 4.0-liter Rangers (and Mazdas, for that matter) ordered without the manual tranny get the first five-speed automatic transmission offer ed for any pickup. Our testers split over the need and/or usefulness of a mileage-biased transmission geared for empty-load flatland running. Those in favor noted the nearly seamless transitions from one gear to the next, and how the transmission itself c ould, if the vehicle was driven right--no jackrabbit leadfoot starts--tack on another 50,000 miles of life to the engine.
On the trail, we found the automatic transmission to be a double-edged sword. The smoothness of the First-to-Second shift, combined with the inherent low-end grunt of the engine, was almost enough to overcome the taller gearing. And in the end, voting followed individual preferences for manuals versus automatics. Two testers noted both the manual transmissions (Mazda and Toyota) felt more "in control" on the twisty low-range trails of Truckhaven, where face-down compression braking was very helpful o n steep-trail crawling. In low-range, our automatic Ranger offered a rather delicate 22.8:1 crawl ratio (First x axle gear x low-range); the Mazda and Toyota offered 34.4:1 and 40.4:1 gearing, respectively.
Likewise, where the stiffened front suspension cleanly handled all paved-road obstacles thrown in its path, the Ford IFS had trouble keeping up with the broken terrain of dry washes, hill climbs, and washboards. Admittedly, it is a rare vehicle that c an manage all the extremes with equal aplomb, but several testers commented that the Ford liked to spring a little bit quicker (and hop higher) off the rolling whoop-de-doos. For the most part, we found the sacrificed off-highway capability to be greater than the gained on-highway performance, and for that reason it didn't score well in the parts of our test that are most heavily-weighted; however, that isn't to say testers weren't squabbling among themselves to get into the Ranger for the highway drives up the mountain.
Finally, testers showed their traditional colors by not favoring the dash-mounted rotary dial ("looks a lot like an A/C control--and no Neutral") of the Borg-Warner 44-05 electronic transfer case. The 44-05 never gave us a lick of trouble--we submerge d the gearboxes under freezing water, as well as subjecting them to high-heat, dust-blasted wash runs--and by going to a dial, floor space opens up, but our scorers' preference is for a lever-actuated system, or anything with a Neutral position, regardles s of the floor space it takes up.
Like any good four wheeler, we found the Ford Ranger could do several things quite well, scoring highly in On-Road Ride and Handling and Interior Comfort. To us, the new Ranger is a nice-looking, comfortable truck that is easy to drive and easy to own . And it's made in plants with a reputation for quality. But the Pickup Truck of the Year has to do it all pretty damn well, and it has to be great off-highway. And so we introduce our 1998 winner.
Ford's 4.0-liter overhead-valve V-6 gave our Regular Cab Ranger plenty of off-the-line motivation with 168 lb.-ft. of rear-wheel torque at 2500 rpm. Mazda's 3.0-liter/five-speed manual transmission gave the Regular Cab B-truck the slowest 0-60 time, but the best fuel economy of the group. Although the middle-sized V-6 of the group, the Toyota 3.4-liter DOHC 24-valve V-6 pulled all the way through the torque curve like most small-blocks.
The Ford five-lug 8.8-inch rearend comes standard with the 4.0-lite/five-speed auto combo. Leaf springs and 3.73:1 axle gears are rated to carry 1,180 pounds. Mazda's 7.5-inch rearend is standard with the 3.0-liter V-6. Not surprisingly, our ride-quality vastly improved with 12 bags of landscape rock in the compact's bed. Toyota's TRD Tacoma comes with the only factory offered rear locking differential on any (full-size or compact) pickup. We found it a huge asset for trail adventures. FORD & MAZDA TOYOTA
Ford's new compact frontend uses F-150-style short- and long-arm IFS, with torsion bars. The setup offers big gains on pavement--but not without trail sacrifices.
The new Pulse-Vacuum Hub (PVH) used exclusively on compact Fords and Mazdas allows for true in-cab-controlled shift-on-the-fly capability.
Toyota's double A-arm/coilover frontend handles pavement cornering and trail flex with equal skill. We like the six-lug axles and big-caliper front discs.
It's our assumption that pickups are made and bought, at some point, to do work. That's why we run our PTOTY test on the track and trail, with beds loaded and unloaded--and separate from sport-utilities, which we regard as primarily made to carry people and their gear.
After weighing each truck at a commercial scale, we subtract that amount from the factory-rated Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) to arrive at an actual maximum payload number. We run track testing with truck beds both empty and with half their calculated payload, this year using 35-pound bags of landscaping rock. In this case, the Ford and Mazda each ran with 16 bags, the Toyota with 18. We think it's valuable to see how each truck performs when carrying a load; that's why they have a bed. For a significant portion of the rest of the test, we run the trucks at half maximum payload. This also allows us to see how mileage is affected, as well as how the engine and chassis react. At each stage of our test, drivers rotated from truck to truck during a variety of terrain changes--recording comments and scoring each truck as they go.
In the end, each tester scores each truck in 38 different categories with "Mechanical" accounting for 25 percent of the book total; "Trail Performance" accounting for 30 percent; "Highway Performance" 20 percent; "Interior" 15 percent; and "Exterior" 10 percent. Each logbook accounts for 80 percent of overall scoring, with the remaining 20 percent centered around our nine "Empirical" tests you'll find in chart form: Ground Clearance, Noise at 55 mph, Payload, and so forth.
Finally, we've printed point totals so readers may weight their own "paper test," awarding points for those aspects of a truck they find most valuable. Some may appreciate interior or highway feel more than we have. Change the percentages around and choose your own winner. Of course, that certainly won't be as much fun (or difficult) as running around the countryside with a group of brand new four-bys.
Here's the suspension on Spoogs #2 best off-roader;
Suspension: Independent double-wishbone front suspension with torsion bar springs and stabilizer bar; 4-link rear suspension with coil springs, stabilizer bar and semi-floating axle --------------------------------------------------
But the Rangers and F150's and Expedition suspensions are designed for the highway using the SAME DESIGN. Gee, maybe spring rate and damping can make a difference?
Spoog said, "The basic Jeep is the best stock production offroader, followed by the Toyota LandCruiser and Toyota Tacoma."
"Ford does not build their trucks with even a HINT of offroad philosophy. They build their trucks to haul, tow , and be comfortable on the highway. They do this job well."
So let me get this straight, unless I'm only interested in offroading, I should get a ranger because it's built to do what a pickup truck should do. (tow, haul, etc.) but if I only care about offroading, then I should get a wrangler?
After reading all those long posts from spoog, I am sold on the ranger. I haul and tow with my truck, which is just what the ranger was built for. Thanks Spoog....... oops... I already have a ranger.... Guess spoog just reenforced the decision I made years ago.....
I'll give you the radio argument except that the Toyota comes stock with a CD and Cassette deck. The Ranger's radio does sound better though. The rest of your comments are bunk though in my opinion. To each their own.
Comments
Quality wise, they the absolute worst quality 4x4 on the market. Worse than Ford, Chevy, or Dodge. Maintenance records support this
I've found that Ford sales departments are generally pretty good. Maybe the fact that there's usually one about 5mins away that has something to do with it. I've heard thousands of horror stories about the service departments, though. But, I can't rate the one I've gone to on a couple of occasions anything other than very good to excellent. Maybe I've just been lucky... I guess it must be an either or thing because their sales staff are a bunch of a$$holes.
Just ready to turn 35K on my XLT. Other than the door sensor and the wiper switch, replace on warrenty, no real issues.
Say spoog, notice you commented favorably on the post from a guy that has problems with a 95 Ranger.
No favorable comments for rick who had problems with his Tacoma.
Your bias is showing badly.
Hit a 97 Chrysler. There was a big Chevy beside me so I backed out slow and the woman did not stop[or back up. And I could no see her.
On the Chrysler, front fender, hood, one light, bra and front bumper were bent/damaged.
My Ranger? Scraped the plastic on the step bumper and bent slightly the reciever hitch cover.
It was about a 3 mph hit.
offroading fun are numbered. \\
Offroading isn't well groomed forest roads.....
\\ She wants a mini-suv
in the family. I can't argue too much either. I
have been very busy the last 6-9 months with my
kids soccer, swimming, basketball, dancing and so
on. This has put a squeeze on my being able to go
into the Cascades as much as I would like. I have
only made it up there about 4 times in the last
month. And a mini-suv will get me into the fishing
areas I like, just can't go onto the harder
trails.. Sigh....\\
The mini SUV won't be a downgrade at all from the Ranger in 4x4 use. The Ranger was never designed for offroad use. Your just as well off getting that new Ford Escape, which is pretty sharp looking. Same ground clearance as the Ranger, and you still get your limited slip.
Consistant mistakes regarding the Tacoma in his discussions indicates this.
Have you ever seen a picture of his? NO! and he has been asked many times.
Remember that commercial of a woman holding up pictures of an SUV seeing what it looks like in front of a boat in a neighbors driveway?
Thats spoog, all dream, no machine. . .
I don't know whats going to happen. I enjoy my Ranger, enjoy the outdoors. I don't plan on making any type of move until next fall anyway. It has come down to whats practical though for the family. So spoog, I have plenty of play time left. Time up in the Cascade range of Oregon /Washington. Doing things in a 4x4 Ranger you only dream of...boy.
FOR A "MIGHTY" RANGER AT ONCE!!.....LOL
A newbee to the room, welcome jray18. How can I burst your "Tacoma is god" bubble today?
I know the open axle gets you Toyota boys going, along with the HP/Torque curve issue, and crashtest issue, along with your cheap and badly laid out interior... LOL! along with the premium price you boys paid for a set of 4 Bilstein shocks and springs, a locker you will maybe use 2% of your total driving time, and a sticker that says "TRD Toyota racing development" ooooh cool... Enjoy the sticker...
Defect Investigations 1989-2000
Ford Ranger - 20
Dodge Dakota- 14
Chevy S10 - 51
Toyota Tacoma - 2
Safety Recalls 1989-2000
Ford Ranger- 32
Dodge Dakota - 28
Chevyy S10 - 47
Toyota Tacoma - 6
Technical Service Bulletins 1989-2000
Ford Ranger -2,279(yes, 2,279)
Dodge Dakota- 940
Chevy S10 -448
Toyota Tacoma - 150
-------
So there you have it. All data is factual, and very telling. This is NOT "subjective".
A trucks reliability and build quality is NOT "subjective".
Not all trucks are built the same, as you can plainly see.
Here is the hard link:
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/problems/
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Better seats
Better ride over rough pavement; less harsh
Less noise, especially wind/road noise
Better sound system
Better ergonomics; the Tacoma has an AWFUL steering wheel; the Ranger has more leg room
So now you can repeat yourself and once again tell me how you love your Tacoma and disagree with my opinion. OK, fire away.
Here is a real truck
I thought you had a Tacoma...
spoog, interesting data on TSB. however, reasearch and data collection never prove anything. they merely suggest a possibility. statistical relevance is also an issue. there seems to be no information regarding the statistical implications of that data. it is my opinion that the percieved quality between foriegn and domestic cars/trucks is GREATLY exaggerated. supposedly, companies like ford are only after the bottom line, the heck with quality. yet, japanese companies care only about quality. right! every company is out to suck the last dollar out form under us. it just so happens, people are suckered into paying a premium for japanese vehicles. granted, i would never buy a chevy but you know what im saying.
personally, i dont understand, if someone is going to have a 4x4 for 4x4 purposes, why wouldnt someone buy a really old jeep, truck, whatever? whats the deal with buying BRAND SPANKING NEW vehicles so you can pretend you are rugged and live in the woods anyway? do you like throwing away thousands of dollars? thats what happens when you buy a new truck. come on! the rigs in the 4x4 mags are all old beat up peices of modified crap and they seem to be doing just fine.
thanks for reading....
vehicle?\\
Production? Specialty?
The basic Jeep is the best stock production offroader, followed by the Toyota LandCruiser and Toyota Tacoma.
\\i noticed that someone stated that a
ranger isnt meant for serious offroading.\\
This is correct. Ford does not build their trucks with even a HINT of offroad philosophy. They build their trucks to haul, tow , and be comfortable on the highway. They do this job well.
\\ if that
is true whats the point? wouldnt that mean that ALL
pickups arent meant for offroading?\\
No. Pickup trucks are not all cut from the same cloth......
\\ if so, wouldnt
a better choice be something like a subaru? a
subaru is a "serious" off road machine considering
its vast experience in winning rallys. are there
various degrees of offroading? where do the ranger
and tacoma fit? im serious! all things considered,
what do those of you with experience believe to be
the most sensible offroad vehicle? please dont tell
me its a brand new $23 thousand dollar pick up.\\
The most sensible offroad vehicle? A used Cj 7 with around 6 grand of work to it.
But this is NOT a reliable vehicle. This is why Toyota has earned such a great world wide offroading reputation:
Not only do they make good offroading trucks, they can take the abuse as well. Thats a pretty rare thing.
The Jeep is stil the better trail vehicle.
WINNER: TOYOTA TACOMA TRD
Although the compact Tacoma XtraCab itself is not completely new, the Toyota Racing Development (TRD) suspension and locking rear differential package is. The TRD Off-Road Package offers oversized fender flares, alloy wheels, 31-inch tires, Bilstein shocks, slightly softer spring rates, and an electromechanical, button-actuated rear locking differential, all for $1,690.
Our Surfside Green test unit came with the 3.4-liter, dual-overhead cam, 24-valve engine and five-speed manual transmission. The Tacoma came factory-equipped with the lowest axle gears of the test: 4.10:1. It was this combination of excellent gearing (First gear for the factory five-speed is 3.83:1) that made testers comment about how readily the Tacoma jumped off the line. In fact, during track testing, the Tacoma was substantially faster than the others, both loaded and unloaded (see page 30). Tract ion came courtesy of a more aggressive tread in the 31x10.50 Goodyear Wrangler three-stage GSA. We found it supplied surprisingly good cornering power on pavement, with plenty of potential for aired-down trail running.
As well as the Tacoma performed on the track, it was on the trail where the premium import seemed most comfortable. Best-in-class ground clearance, the most aggressive tread of the bunch, and a crawl ratio of better than 40:1 made the Tacoma everyone' s choice for hill climbs and steep backside descents. Even our resident auto-tranny diehards had to admit that the lively throttle response, sure-grip clutch, and built-to-work gearing meshed together as well as any championship-caliber team. In each perf ormance-related category of our test, the Toyota won.
It's not often that our collection of testers agree on anything (in fact, never), but this year's Pickup Truck of the Year was a unanimous decision. Praises relating to the TRD suspension mentioned its ability to control rutted, seriously choppy terra in better than any other vehicle we'd driven. One tester went so far as to note that during a few moments of an effortless dry-wash run, it seemed the spirit of Ivan Stewart had taken over his body. This is a truck that can go slow or go fast, on pavement or off.
Ultimately, in addition to a strong engine, good tires, and supremely tuned suspension, the clutch defeat switch (the only one in a truck sold in the US.), lever-operated transfer case, and pushbutton locking rear differential were the icing on a toug h-truck cake. Although you have to pay a premium for a premium package, the TRD Tacoma, dollar for dollar, is the best on- and off-highway compact package (maybe of any truck) we've seen. This truck has features the others just don't offer, and they all w ork. And that's why it's our 1998 Pickup Truck of the Year.
We would characterize the drivetrain, specifically the transmission, as biased for highway performance as well. All 4.0-liter Rangers (and Mazdas, for that matter) ordered without the manual tranny get the first five-speed automatic transmission offer ed for any pickup. Our testers split over the need and/or usefulness of a mileage-biased transmission geared for empty-load flatland running. Those in favor noted the nearly seamless transitions from one gear to the next, and how the transmission itself c ould, if the vehicle was driven right--no jackrabbit leadfoot starts--tack on another 50,000 miles of life to the engine.
On the trail, we found the automatic transmission to be a double-edged sword. The smoothness of the First-to-Second shift, combined with the inherent low-end grunt of the engine, was almost enough to overcome the taller gearing. And in the end, voting followed individual preferences for manuals versus automatics. Two testers noted both the manual transmissions (Mazda and Toyota) felt more "in control" on the twisty low-range trails of Truckhaven, where face-down compression braking was very helpful o n steep-trail crawling. In low-range, our automatic Ranger offered a rather delicate 22.8:1 crawl ratio (First x axle gear x low-range); the Mazda and Toyota offered 34.4:1 and 40.4:1 gearing, respectively.
Likewise, where the stiffened front suspension cleanly handled all paved-road obstacles thrown in its path, the Ford IFS had trouble keeping up with the broken terrain of dry washes, hill climbs, and washboards. Admittedly, it is a rare vehicle that c an manage all the extremes with equal aplomb, but several testers commented that the Ford liked to spring a little bit quicker (and hop higher) off the rolling whoop-de-doos. For the most part, we found the sacrificed off-highway capability to be greater than the gained on-highway performance, and for that reason it didn't score well in the parts of our test that are most heavily-weighted; however, that isn't to say testers weren't squabbling among themselves to get into the Ranger for the highway drives up the mountain.
Finally, testers showed their traditional colors by not favoring the dash-mounted rotary dial ("looks a lot like an A/C control--and no Neutral") of the Borg-Warner 44-05 electronic transfer case. The 44-05 never gave us a lick of trouble--we submerge d the gearboxes under freezing water, as well as subjecting them to high-heat, dust-blasted wash runs--and by going to a dial, floor space opens up, but our scorers' preference is for a lever-actuated system, or anything with a Neutral position, regardles s of the floor space it takes up.
Like any good four wheeler, we found the Ford Ranger could do several things quite well, scoring highly in On-Road Ride and Handling and Interior Comfort. To us, the new Ranger is a nice-looking, comfortable truck that is easy to drive and easy to own . And it's made in plants with a reputation for quality. But the Pickup Truck of the Year has to do it all pretty damn well, and it has to be great off-highway. And so we introduce our 1998 winner.
The Ford five-lug 8.8-inch rearend comes standard with the 4.0-lite/five-speed auto combo. Leaf springs and 3.73:1 axle gears are rated to carry 1,180 pounds. Mazda's 7.5-inch rearend is standard with the 3.0-liter V-6. Not surprisingly, our ride-quality vastly improved with 12 bags of landscape rock in the compact's bed.
Toyota's TRD Tacoma comes with the only factory offered rear locking differential on any (full-size or compact) pickup. We found it a huge asset for trail adventures.
FORD & MAZDA TOYOTA
Ford's new compact frontend uses F-150-style short- and long-arm IFS, with torsion bars. The setup offers big gains on pavement--but not without trail sacrifices.
The new Pulse-Vacuum Hub (PVH) used exclusively on compact Fords and Mazdas allows for true in-cab-controlled shift-on-the-fly capability.
Toyota's double A-arm/coilover frontend handles pavement cornering and trail flex with equal skill. We like the six-lug axles and big-caliper front discs.
After weighing each truck at a commercial scale, we subtract that amount from the factory-rated Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) to arrive at an actual maximum payload number. We run track testing with truck beds both empty and with half their calculated payload, this year using 35-pound bags of landscaping rock. In this case, the Ford and Mazda each ran with 16 bags, the Toyota with 18. We think it's valuable to see how each truck performs when carrying a load; that's why they have a bed. For a significant portion of the rest of the test, we run the trucks at half maximum payload. This also allows us to see how mileage is affected, as well as how the engine and chassis react.
At each stage of our test, drivers rotated from truck to truck during a variety of terrain changes--recording comments and scoring each truck as they go.
In the end, each tester scores each truck in 38 different categories with "Mechanical" accounting for 25 percent of the book total;
"Trail Performance" accounting for 30 percent; "Highway Performance" 20 percent; "Interior" 15 percent; and "Exterior" 10 percent. Each logbook accounts for 80 percent of overall scoring, with the remaining 20 percent centered around our nine "Empirical" tests you'll find in chart form: Ground Clearance, Noise at 55 mph, Payload, and so forth.
Finally, we've printed point totals so readers may weight their own "paper test," awarding points for those aspects of a truck they find most valuable. Some may appreciate interior or highway feel more than we have. Change the percentages around and choose your own winner. Of course, that certainly won't be as much fun (or difficult) as running around the countryside with a group of brand new four-bys.
-Edmunds.com
" The Ranger rattled like a Diamonback offroad"
- Edmunds.com
Suspension: Independent double-wishbone front suspension with torsion bar springs and stabilizer bar; 4-link rear suspension with coil springs, stabilizer bar and semi-floating axle
--------------------------------------------------
But the Rangers and F150's and Expedition suspensions are designed for the highway using the SAME DESIGN. Gee, maybe spring rate and damping can make a difference?
I think I hear a TSB list coming up!!
"The basic Jeep is the best stock production
offroader, followed by the Toyota LandCruiser and
Toyota Tacoma."
"Ford does not build their trucks
with even a HINT of offroad philosophy. They build
their trucks to haul, tow , and be comfortable on
the highway. They do this job well."
So let me get this straight, unless I'm only interested in offroading, I should get a ranger because it's built to do what a pickup truck should do. (tow, haul, etc.) but if I only care about offroading, then I should get a wrangler?
where does the tacoma fit into all of this?