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.
Comments
Will get you my new contact info tomorrow at work. I've switched jobs and am not at Raytheon any more.
I'll be willing to go 4-wheeling this summer. As long as the trail is wide enough to accomodate our Expedition, I'm game.
SPOOG: Drive out to Colorado this summer. Cpousnr and I will go ANYWHERE off-road you're willing to go. No problem! Be sure your supercharger is working, as power drops 10% for every 1000 ft of elevation above sea level, and we'll be over 8000-10,000 ft. We wouldn't want to have to rescue you because your Tacoma didn't have the poop it needed.
(Dennis, I'm sure you're up for the challenge)
I have a friend with a Jeep Cherokee who had to BACK DOWN about a mile (before there was room to turn around) WITHOUT POWER because his Jeep totally ran out of power about 200 yards short of one of our tall passes, died and wouldn't restart. His pucker factor was about 10+. Needless to say, he no longer takes that Cherokee off-road.
No problem. I know own part of a cabin and some land on the west side of the divide near Pagosa springs now.
Oh, and you wont be able to go where I can go, simple as that. First of all, you are gonna need a good locker. Secondly, My Tacoma has around 270 HP and near 300 torque thanks to the supercharger.
Don't you guys learn anything? 4wheeler BASHED the ranger in the offroading department! lol! Bashed it!
It PRAISED the tacoma over and over-
" The tacoma TRD handled the rough stuff better than any vheicle we have driver"
-4wheeler.com
Dont you think this statement has any merit? lol!
" The ranger was tuned for the highway, and had trouble ' whoopty-doing' on the hills"
4wheeler.com
" The Tacoma is a tough truck ,and offers features that others simply dont offer, making it the best truck package we have seen(on any truck)."
4 wheeler.com
You will NOT, I repeat NOT be able to go in your car suspension Rangers where I can go in my finely honed and tuned Tacoma TRD.
To suggest otherwise is an exercise in futility.
BTW- I have yet to NEED a locker, and I have done some pretty narly trails in the last 15 years here. Experience trumps equipment every time.
I once drove from Casper, WY to Denver and had to do it in a decent little snowfall (and in a Toyota Camry). From about Ft. Collins south (on I-25) all the way through the tech-center, I was stuck in traffic. I saw all kinds of SUV's and trucks that slid off the road and/or crashed with other vehicles. People were driving like morons in their trucks and slidiing all over the place. They simply weren't driving safely because they thought they were invincible in their 4x4.
I've seen similar incidents in here in NJ too. I think a big part of this comes from the way the manufacturer's present their product on TV. When did you ever see a Jeep commercial that did not show a Jeep blowing right through some huge snow drift.
Spoog (if you read this) I really wasn't trying to put you down or anything. I love reading those comments about the Tacoma and other Toyota 4x4's. I'd just like to hear your own comments. I'm sure they're listed in the previous 500 posts somewhere but I'm not about to read all of them.
Man, you are SOOO right about that! When we first moved to Colorado in 1985 and bought our first 4x4 (Toyota), I even had a cocky, invincible attitude until I slid into the ditch. I now drive with a totally different attitude. In fact, I only engage 4-high when I absolutely need to. Running in 4-high when its slippery tends to mask or camoflage how bad it really is. I prefer to run in 2-high because I can then experience what everyone else is feeling in their 4x2s and drive accordingly. Of course, if the rear end keeps sliding out, I engage 4-high and proceed very SLOWLY.
I agree, its the marketeers that create the "vision" that if you buy one of their 4x4s, you can go anywhere, anytime, (and worst of all) at ANY speed! Many Kalifornicators move here in the summer, then buy a 4x4, and then crash in the first snowstorm. Its truly amazing.
Interestingly, after a few snow storms, the morons must somehow learn their lesson, because the number of crashes and rollovers decreases substantially.
After the first big storm we had this winter, I saw an "invincible" Toyota Land Cruiser (world's BEST 4x4) stuck nose-first into the ditch. He was obviously driving WAAAY too fast for the conditions and just slid off in a turn. It was too steep for him to back out, so there he sat, looking real silly, waiting for the tow truck. I got a real giggle out of that.
Skid plates
Highest ground clearance
Off-road tires
Off-road suspension
Off-road shocks
Clutch cancel switch
Locker
Winch
Tow hooks
etc.
The fact that Toyota bothers to add most of these things (not the winch) to their 4x4s is commendable, and certainly allows them to focus their marketing strategy on off-roaders. Perhaps that's why their sales numbers have never and WILL never exceed Ford's. They just don't build what most people need or want.
As spoog quoted Edmunds: "The Expedition is a sales-leader in this growing market, and will remain so as long as people keep buying big sport-utes. Like many of Ford's products, the Expedition takes aim at a large group of people instead of a narrow, targeted market. The result is that the Expedition can win the sales crown without being the best in any single category. The idea is: appeal to a broad group, sell to a broad group. From a business standpoint, it's hard to argue with that type of idea. However, since we're journalists, not businesspeople, we'd like to see Ford concentrate more on a few specific areas, like on-road handling and off-road ruggedness."
I believe this strategy of Ford's applies to all their trucks and SUVs and is why they not only sell so many, but can do it for less money than Toyota. Plus, if a buyer truly wants most of those "off-road" components, Ford offers them as relatively inexpensive options (not the locker or switch, which are really hard-core).
Comments?
Steve
The debate is still on in 2001 on who will have the best 3/4 or 1ton truck, given Chevy's new HD series. Prior to 2001, Fords SuperDuty series was the clear winner there..
You mention that Porche and Ferrari build to be the best in their class.. How does one measure that.. For sports cars, I would think that acceleration, braking, cornering, whould be more important. Basically 'RACING'.. I agree, not alot of sales to folks who want to race..
For Luxury cars, emphasis is placed on maximum driver comfort and image.
For pickup trucks. I think the 'usefulness' should be a key factor to consider as it is supposed to be a utility type of vehicle. A vehicle that works reliably and performs well in a wide variety of conditions while hauling or towing your intended cargo...
If the Tacoma has an advantage 'off-road', then sure, let someone claim that it wins the 'works best offroad when showroom stock' category..
Fords Ranger seems to be doing about the best in the 'works reliably and performs well in a wide variety of conditions while hauling your intended cargo' class. (Thus why it's sales are so high).
You quote: 'Having a vehicle that is built for the trail will only make it more reliable on the road anyway'
I say:
Not always. It is a fact that 4x2's are more reliable than 4x4 on the highway.. The locking rear diff does not make the rear end more reliable on the highway.
Off road tires don't make a truck more reliable..
Ground clearance does not help on-road driving characteristics or make the truck more reliable.
Skid plates, clutch cancel switches, winches, tow hooks, do not make a truck more reliable.
In 5 years, there will alot more 2001 Rangers on the road than 2001 Tacomas.. Even if you take into account the number of Rangers vs. Tacoma's sold..
The Tacoma is a high quality vehicle as is the Ranger.
would you rather have a vehicle that is top in its class in 1 category, and near the bottom in 3 others? personally, I'd rather have a vehicle that's near the top in all categories. You say Ford builds lots of bad vehicles. I disagree. Ford cars certainly aren't anything special, but they're not terrible. As for Ford Trucks, I can't think of a bad one.
-What are you talking about?
"Having a truck built for the trail will only make it more reliable on the road anyway."
-Huh???
"FACT: The vehicle is designed for both off road and on road."
-How does that help you if don't take it off-road?
"The Tacoma is an engineering masterpiece, both on road and off."
-That's why it got lousy crashtest results?
First of all the Tacoma is now the weaker truck. Ford answered the challenge by installing the new SOHC 4.0 into the Ranger. This V6 stomps the Tacoma in HP and Torque and in the HP/Torque curve..
There are those in this room who act like they offroad every minute of the day and have to traverse a class 3 trail on their way to work.. Fact is we don't. The Ranger offers more variations, more options, more flexability than the Tacoma. This huge quality/reliablity gap that Toyota owners want to portray doesn't exist. Yes, the Tacoma has a VERY slight advantage but is it worth 2-3K? or even more if you opt for a TRD? I am on my second Ranger and it has proven to be every bit reliable and offroad worthy as my first. Ranger will continue to outsell Tacoma for years to come. By the way, if the Ranger was such an inferior, terrible truck, why has it been the BEST selling compact truck for 14 years straight?
Huh?
Ok, let's step back to reality now.
Eagle- For example, I've yet to find a long term happy Mustang owner (1994 to present). That is a nice looking piece of junk if I ever saw one. Junk designs like their cracking plastic intake manifold (every Mustang owner I personally know with a 94-96 had a cracked manifold and it's since been recalled) convinced more people than you may realize never to buy a Ford again. That's unfortunate because Ford does build some nice vehicles. Another, though not nearly as bad, is the big selling Explorer. Not too bad of a vehicle but too many experience problems in the first few years than should. The 98 I drive occasionally has had, I believe, six to eight recalls already. I don't remember for sure. It also had a bad throttle body and a tie rod problem. The 4.0 V^ everyone wants in their Ranger is extremely problem prone. I'm finding that even though some are luckier, too many have bad experience. I could go on to the Escort but I've written enough.
I can't say that I agree with your logic.
If reliability was my one and only concern, I'd take a 5-speed 2wd truck with an I6.
For instance, the old 2.9L V6 in the pre-90 Rangers was a gem. It was reliable, efficient, and always seemed to exceed its power ratings. So, they replace it. Also, when not beaten on by some kid, the old OHV 5L could take its licks too. So, they replace it.
I know that they've got to innovate, or they'll fizzle and die. But, at least replace your product with one that is better right off the bat, not after a year or two.
The recent occurances with the introductions of the Escape and Focus have been ridiculous.
I guess the lesson I've learned is not to buy that new Ford offering (model or engine) for the first couple of years. It seems like Ford prefers to have the product spend less time in the R&D phase and put it in "field testing" ASAP.
Yes, the standard Tacoma didn't score good in the side impact test. How did the taller 4X4 or Prerunner score? They have the same doors, but the height can make a difference. I'm making no excuses. I bet Toyota engineers will soon fix that problem soon.
What else do you have on the Tacoma?
Like I said earlier, lets see how a 2001 Ranger is looking/driving in 5 years. I bet the Ranger will start nickel and diming you to the point where you will have to sell it, like most domestic vehicles.
Bottom line: Some people like Fords. Others like me like Toyotas. I'll take my chances in my Taco 4X4, eventhough it's the most dangerous vehicle on the planet!
Cheers,
Steve
As for the Mustang, I can't say I'm a big fan. TO be honest, I'm not a fan of any American sports cars. (except the old classics from the 60's)
-This is precisely the problem. With absolutely no data at all, you're assuming that the ranger will fall apart after 5 years. I don't like to side myself with Vince very often, but I think this is what he means when he talks about the "toyota is god bubble."
Now spoog is correct to a degree. A Tacoma can get into tighter places than an Explorer.
I was looking at a locker setup for the Dana 34 on the front of a Ranger. Costs about 300 for the parts, maybe 150 to install if you do not do it yourself.
How about you jholc? Know an area about 5 miles east of Castle Rock you would love.
The only problem I've had was a sloppy U-joint, which was promptly replaced by the local service department under warranty.
All I've ever done was change the oil, rotate the tires, and put in gas. Everything else is still straight from the factory with many miles remaining on the typical wear items (tires, brakes, etc...)
Do I think that it will start "nickel and diming" me at 5 years old? Absolutely not.
Do I think a Tacoma would "nickel and dime" me at 5 years old? Absolutely not.
But if believing that a Ranger will "nickel and dime" you at 5 years old makes you feel better about buying your Toyota, feel free.
There's always a trade-off between building the best vehicle and building a vehicle that "normal" people can afford.
BTW, I'd take one of those "old and outdated" air-cooled 911's anyday over one of their latest and greatest.
As Eagle states, this is exactly the 'toyota is god' attitude some Toyota owners have which has no basis in facts. (spoog, don't bother re-posting the dribble you normally do after someones states that the Rangers quality is similar to the Tacoma's)
I wonder why people just keep buying all these Fords that are going to fall apart after 5 years? The Explorer outsells the 4Runner almost 4 to 1!! The Ranger outsells the TAcoma almost 2.5 to 1 and keeps on selling and selling and selling.. I see the "Toyota is god" sentiment is out again.. with the statement of the Ranger will nickel and dime you after 5 years?? I am now going into my 4th year with no problems her Toyota fans...
By the way the Ranger comes with skidplates, IF YOU WANT THEM... I didn't know you could choose what kind of vehicle is going to hit you in an accident??
From what I hear, Ford revised the timing chain tensioner in '98.
I can't say that I've heard of another reliability issue with this motor. From all accounts, it's powerful and reliable (as long as you don't get one of the first batches).
I wouldn't hesitate a bit to get one in a '01 Ranger.
-thanks-
One I found interesting was the satisfaction index.
Ford ranked 21st with about a 64% highly satisfied rating.
Toyota ranked 27th with about a 61 % highly satisfied rating.
Hey, when I spell check, Tacoma comes up with the suggestion:
Taco ma. . .
The reliability gap shrunk according to CR with US makers improving from over 100 defects per hundred cars to just over 20. Japanese makers improved from about 35 to 16 per hundred cars. These were figures from 1980-2000.
Ranger was, again, a recommended buy and Tacoma was not.
Ranger was ranked high in all areas except brakes, integrity and electrical, kind of keying in on the wiper switch issue etc, and Tacoma ranked very high in all areas except suspension, paint/trim, integrity and electrical.
Older Rangers seem to have problems in fuel and ignition, Tacoma's in transmission problems and the V6 engine for the 95-96 is marked way down.
Just FYI. . .
Vince- Check out the "Perpetual Explorer Woes" forum to start and you'll see that it's full of posts complaining about the 4.0 V6. Everything from noise, to stalling, to early engine death. Ford has had a terrible time with this engine and in fact, has had to increase the warranty on the intake gasket and belt tensioners because of all of the problems. From the posts, it looks like they may still have not come up with foolproof solutions either. Hopefully they've got the problem finally solved because the engine feels like a V8 and, aside from the idle noise, is fun to drive. It would be great in a Ranger.
As for the "Toyota is God" comments, remember that Toyota took a long time to build their reputation. I remember as a kid that everyone thought they were junk. The Ranger is proving to arguably be Ford's top vehicle in respect to quality and will take time to be perceived the same way.
Thats because you have never owned or experienced a reliable 4x4.
See. thats the kicker with Toyota. Their 4x4's are as reliable as their 2x4's.
That Toyota quality and durability is no "bubble".
The fact is that data year in and year out proves it. Here is a 5 year reliability test. Thats right, FIVE years. Why do Toyota trucks win this every time? Face it gang, the gig is up.
http://www.jdpa.com/studies/pressrelease.asp?StudyID=292&CatID=1
Oops@! Ford finished below the industry average.
-Edmunds.com
" The ranger rattled like a rattlesnake offroad"
-Edmunds.com
" We wish Ford would make trucks with more ruggedness"
-Edmunds.com
If spoog should ever accept the offer from rick, I know of a late 80's Ranger that would offer quite a challenge. 2.9L engine with over 180K miles, 4.56 non-locker gearing. I have seen that vehicle climb where I certainly cannot and go thru water to the middle of the door.
Now on the plus side, the Toyota vehicles are great platforms. Great reliability, in general, and great fit and finish as has been posted here quite often. With the exception of my 81 Toyota diesel pickup, my experience with those vehicles was good.
Just do not discount the Ranger...
Hmmm spoog spell checks as:
spoof. . .
Wrong yet again (and again and again).
Why don't you just go back and read your beloved article and quit posting about things of which you have no idea?
FORD ESCORT
was in the list of compact cars.
I would not consider the Escort a great car. I mean it runs o. and is good for someone on a real budget... but not the highest quality Ford
TACOMA
So the point of the link would be?
"Thats because you have never owned or experienced a reliable 4x4.
See. thats the kicker with Toyota. Their 4x4's are as reliable as their 2x4's."
-------------------------------------------------
Toyota also makes lumber???????
How come the Tacoma uses a coil over type IFS and the Land Cruiser uses a torsion bar IFS (like Ford)?? Which is better? I thought Toy used the same design philosophy on all their trucks. How come the 3rd world L/C gets a diesel? You mean the L/C for the extreme expeditions isn't the same as the one you get here??? Gee, I thought Toy had the same philosophy across the board......