Ask the Car People.SM


Compact Pickup Comparison: Frontier, Ranger, Tacoma, S10, Dakota, B-Series, & Hombre - READ ONLY

579 messages,  Last post on Apr 15, 2002 at 5:02 AM

You are in the Pickups - Archived Discussions Forum.

This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Javascript runtime error--TypeError: obj has no properties-- see logJsError391.html for a stack trace discussion.

What is this discussion about? Nissan Frontier, Ford Ranger, Toyota Tacoma, Dodge Dakota, Mazda B-Series Pickup

Messages Page 55 of 59

#537 of 579 ok by midnight_stang

Apr 12, 2002 (5:42 am)

akweiland--->Talk to a edmunds user named "smgilles", he has a supercharged Taco, not sure if it's 4x4 or what year exactly, but he may have a timeslip.
 
pluto--->You didn't find that, it's smgilles find.
 
All re: that link--->I'm curious about the methodology of that link. I wonder why you don't see any Tundra's in there at all?
 
Also answer this question seriously, if consumer A owned a vehicle with no problems, and Consumer B owned a vehicle with many problems, which consumer would be most likely to complain or post their beef with the vehicle, say by taking an online survey?
 
Factor that in with the amount of vehicles on the road.
 
If you look at the breakdowns, they become convoluted. For instance, 1999 Fords compared with 1999 Ranger shows an average of 580 Dollars spent on Fords, and 360 spent on Rangers. But the breakdown into system components become suspicious. Ford Cooling system, exhaust system, and Air conditioning show little to no problems (well below industry average). Engine, Brakes, transmission(auto), Electrical and suspension all show above 1999 industry average costs. However in each instance, the Ranger shows 0 cost per category.
 
So how does 0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0 = 360 for the year of 1999? Is this factoring in old 1983-1999 Rangers with repairs made in 1999, and comparing that to 1995-1999 Tacomas? Something doesn't add up.
 
I'm not discounting the Tacoma has a better reputation, but I don't think we are looking at a broad population of consumers to make this one of those rules to live or buy from. It does make a good supporting argument, however.

#538 of 579 akweiland by sc0rpi0

Apr 12, 2002 (6:40 am)

Ah, you are looking at buying what I got
2002 TRD SR5 Xtracab, V6 manual 4x4, with power, and thats about it, I paid 21,800 - 400 college grad rebate + TTL.
Of course, this was in TX. I'm not sure now easy it is to get a truck in Alaska, but lets say that: I went through the net, wrote to the dealer that I wanted exactly these options, calculated invoice price on them, gave him 3% holdback (they already get 2%, so 5% is not too bad) and that was my offer. I ended up paying, with rebate, $100 over the invoice (there are some tricks: SR5 package enjoys a nice $700 discount off the MSRP, but when you buy it invoice, you sort of have to pay the full price). I spoke with a dealer, he told me he'd have to get it from the distribution port, and it'd be 2-3 weeks. 4 days later he called me and said it was in the parking lot waiting to be picked up.
For all your charged needs, go to www.tacomaterritory.com , it's a tacoma offroaders board, they have plenty of people with charger, headers, air, etc.

#539 of 579 Thanks by akweiland

Apr 12, 2002 (8:05 am)

Thanks for the Information scorpio. Up here in Alaska, trucks make up probably 55% of the vehicles. However, there is only one Toyota dealer in the whole state and they are trying to rip me off.

#540 of 579 akeiland by smgilles

Apr 12, 2002 (8:46 am)

I have a S/C 4x4 and have ran low 15's (15.2) was the best time, but I also have 32" tires. I imagine a S-runner is in the mid to high 14's with just a S/C and lows with exhaust and headers. I am just running S/C and a better filter. I am currently looking to upgrade exhaust and headers. Check out the website scorpio gave you, lots of good info. there.
 
Do not buy the Jet chip. They do not work with our Tacomas because the ECU is not reprogrammable. So basically they are snake oil as far as I am concerned.

#541 of 579 akeisland by tgravo2

Apr 12, 2002 (8:58 am)

I've seen posts with the S-Runner supercharged running 0-60 between 6 and 6.5 seconds.

#542 of 579 that link by tbunder

Apr 12, 2002 (10:49 am)

well, i finally did just check it out. i find it amusing that pluto tried to claim it as his, when smgilles posted it here and the other forum us close edmunds forum users use. "look what i just found". hehe
 
anyways, ok, that's a good argument for you toyota guys. good points. but, stang is right. that argument or article really doesn't represent the whole buying public. surveys don't mean squat. they are just a sample of the general public. kind of like election polls, they mean jack. everyone knows parts for a ranger are cheaper than any toyota part. also, if you're going to post links like that, AT LEAST maybe they could be current? i mean, we're almost into 2003 model year territory and that article was still using 1999 models.
 
pluto- im not gonna try and find an article for you. i simply don't care. i like the ranger AND the tacoma. whatever one suits my needs, i will buy. they're both good trucks. i just happen to be a ford guy and always will be. if ford doesn't make a crew cab ranger for '03, ill probably end up getting a tacoma for a year or at least until ford makes a crew cab ranger. im passing on the liberty or any suv for that matter. i actually don't care what others say about what truck is best. for me, the ranger is just as good, and better than the tacoma imo. it is just as good off-road with some real tires and even an aftermarket locker if you think you need one. i never did. they have more power and more creature comforts along with a sturdier built chassis. all for a lower price. and even with better tires and maybe a locker on the ranger, you're still looking at a truck that's cheaper than any tacoma w/o any of those things.

#543 of 579 tbundy by plutonious

Apr 12, 2002 (11:08 am)

"if you're going to post links like that, AT LEAST maybe they could be current? i mean, we're almost into 2003 model year territory and that article was still using 1999 models."
 
You have a dazzling intellect, tbundy. I would really like for you to explain to us all how reliability surveys can be conducted on 2003 models. You see, tbundy, when such surveys are conducted, they need to encompass trucks that have been around for a while to see how they held up...hence 1999 models and such being used in the survey...
 
"pluto- im not gonna try and find an article for you"
 
Why not? I've always found it easy to find articles where the Tacoma beats the Ranger! I think what you're really saying is "I CAN'T find an article!"

#544 of 579 nah..... by tbunder

Apr 12, 2002 (11:18 am)

im saying I DONT CARE. grow up, how old are you anyways?
 
and if your theory is right, how come jd powers can come up with real world data in a year?
 
why dont you find some current material, instead of posting about '99s and your ancient '98. everyone knows that the ranger was improved in a lot of ways for the '01 model year. yesterday i even saw a pre-runner version ranger called the TREMOR. it is all stereo. what's toyota got to offer to compare to that? oh yeah, nothing.

#545 of 579 Oh my! by plutonious

Apr 12, 2002 (11:32 am)

"and if your theory is right, how come jd powers can come up with real world data in a year?"
 
Well, now how can JD Powers do that with the 2003s? Have they been out a year? Now you're saying JD Powers has "real world data?" Except when it rates Toyotas as superior, right? LOL, you are the most consistently inconsistent person I've ever "met!"
 
OOOH, the TREMOR!!! I'm trembling! Come back and talk comparing trucks when Ford equips their off-road specific trucks with things like lockers instead of MP3 players...

#546 of 579 tbunder by sc0rpi0

Apr 12, 2002 (11:41 am)

So.....Liberty is out too. Well, I can't say I did not see that coming. Why don't you just get a bestselling Escape? 5-7 recalls a year don't seem to bother you, so why not?
What does "it is all stereo" mean? It has a big "doof doof" stereo? From what I could find in 5 seconds, Tremor has 3.0L engine.....thats not a good thing. At least our prerunner comes with 3.4L (or 2.7L 150hp one). So how can you say Toyota got nothing to compare to that?
As for JD Powers: they are also doing a survey.
And if done properly, surveys can be a real statistical indication of the measured phenomenon. And if you want to mention JD Powers: In 2001 data, Ranger did not score all that high. Certainly lower than Tacoma.

Messages Page 55 of 59

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement