Ask the Car People.SM


Toyota Tacoma vs. Ford Ranger, Part XII - READ ONLY

1840 messages,  Last post on Oct 02, 2002 at 4:10 PM

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-- no stack trace file was written discussion.

What is this discussion about? Toyota Tacoma, Ford Ranger

Messages Page 104 of 185

#1025 of 1840 rickc5 by plutonious

May 03, 2002 (9:14 am)

Let's not forget what happened to the economy, though. In 1998, the stock market was sky-high, tech industry was booming and people were buying vehicles. I honestly don't think I would have saved that much in 1998 had I bought a Ranger instead. I'm sure the deal on your 2002 Ranger was influenced by the stock market crash and 9/11 - two things which didn't affect my purchase.
 
But even if I could have saved, I didn't want a Ranger. I've driven them, and I simply like the Tacoma better. I wanted what the TRD offered, and Ford STILL doesn't make anything comparable.

#1026 of 1840 pluto: Hold on just a minute...... by rickc5

May 03, 2002 (5:29 pm)

You're making a pretty big assumption, with no basis of fact to base it on. I will concur that the overall decrease in current automotive purchases had something to do with both 9/11 and the "dot.bombs" that crashed the market. But, there's NO way you can extrapolate that Rangers cost more in 1998 than they do today. The only way I could even come close to accepting that "logic" is if some 1998 Ranger buyers are able to substantiate your assumption. I seem to recall cpousnr (Dennis) paid about $18.5K for his well-equipped Ranger, but I can't recall if its a '97 or '98. Anyway, that's still substantially less than you paid. Whatever.
 
BTW- After owning TWO Tacomas, and now a Ranger, I'm much happier with my Ranger after two months of ownership than I was after two months of owning my new '99 Tacoma or my new '95 Tacoma. I only kept the '99 for eight months, it irritated me so much. Since I primarily drive on paved roads, the TRD package was a nuisance, NOT a blessing. I wanted the TRD for off-roading, but in my opinion, a TRD Tacoma is NOT a good paved-road truck.
 
Some things I really like about my Ranger that aren't even available on the Tacoma:
1) Four-spoke steering wheel, leather wrapped. I HATED that "one-spoke" Tacoma wheel. No place to hook my thumbs.
2) A clock I can see, that didn't cost extra.
3) Electric mirrors (only avail on Tacoma Limited).
4) The third and fourth doors.
5) Truly comfortable bucket seats (I heard Toyota finally improved theirs???).
6) An MP3 player (also plays CDs).
7) A five-speed automatic transmission.
8) A security system that didn't cost extra.
9) The no-cost bed liner.

#1027 of 1840 I paid by scape2

May 03, 2002 (7:24 pm)

$19,600 for a fully loaded Ranger XLT 4x4 4.0 in 1998. When I priced way back then a Tacoma comparably equiped would have run me $22,800. I remember this because I was interested in the Tacoma until I saw the prices they wanted for them..
Plain truth of it is I am a Toyota fans worst nightmare... A Ranger owner that uses his Ranger as a true 4x4, who paid thousands less, who has never had any problems with their Ranger..
I am living proof that is perceived quality/reliability advantage is just that... perceived.. Both of these trucks are capable, reliabile and quality built.. Both are good trucks..

#1028 of 1840 rickc5 by eagle63

May 03, 2002 (8:33 pm)

"Four-spoke steering wheel, leather wrapped. I HATED that "one-spoke" Tacoma wheel. No place to hook my thumbs."
-the last Taco I test drove had a 4 spoke wheel...
 
"Electric mirrors (only avail on Tacoma Limited)."
-not true, this is readily available on SR5's.
 
"An MP3 player (also plays CDs)."
-who cares, just go aftermarket.
 
"A security system that didn't cost extra.
The no-cost bed liner."
I'm pretty sure you still paid for it. -nothing is really free.
 
"The third and fourth doors."
-I couldn't agree more.
 
Toyota definitely made some changes since the '99 model year, so my arguments might be moot. And yes, the seats are a lot better now.

#1029 of 1840 scape2 by allknowing

May 03, 2002 (9:07 pm)

Really Vince, they're all liars!!! I guess Toyota makes fewer trucks because they spend too much time and money buying off virtually every publication that rates small trucks. We all know that Toyota doesn't really have better overall quality now don't we. Cunsumer Reports etc. is simply making up all of the data showing that the Tacoma has fewer problems than the Ranger. Yeh, you're their worse nightmare and you'll take care of them!!!!.
By the way, the Ranger is a good truck but at the same general quality level as the Tacoma....nobody believes in fairytales here.

#1030 of 1840 allknowing by scape2

May 04, 2002 (9:07 am)

we have been around in this room for years now...
Look right here at Edmunds and compare data of past Tacoma's and Rangers, also visit msn.com and thier reliability data shows you different. The Ranger is not as unreliable and of poor build quality as you want to believe in YOUR MIND. Like I said, I am a Toyota fans worst nightmare.. A Ranger owner with miles on his truck and NOT ONE PROBLEM.. paid thousands less, can go anywhere a Tacoma can, use my Ranger as a real 4x4 in the Cascade range and deserts of Eastern Oregon....
You just go on believing what you want and justifying the extra 2-3K most Tacoma owners spent for that preceived reliability/quality advantage..
By the way.. Whats up with this Toyota sludge/engine issue??

#1031 of 1840 eagle: Yes, I was comparing my new Ranger.... by rickc5

May 04, 2002 (9:30 am)

to my '99 Tacoma SR5. I haven't been to a Toyota dealership since 2000. I'm glad to hear that Toyota finally upgraded some of the Tacomas really bad points (wheel & seats).
 
Indeed, I know nothing is really free, but the liner, security system and all the other stuff were part of the $19.4K I paid for the Ranger, not something "added-on" by the dealer after the sale (a typical Toyota trick) for extra money. Sure, you can go after-market for ANYTHING. I spent over $3000 on things for my Tacoma that it didn't come with (total Tacoma investment of over $25K). The point is that I don't feel I NEED or WANT to spend additional monies on the Ranger, except for the better tires I already purchased. To each his own.
 
Again, in my opinion, the new "toothy" grille on the newer Tacomas is a major turn-off. It reminds me too much of John Elway (check it out), and I'm not a Broncos fan. That being said, I believe it was Scorpio who posted pics of his late model Tacoma in all-over silver that actually looked pretty good. Best Tacoma I've ever seen, and I have yet to see any similar monochrome Tacomas around Denver.

#1032 of 1840 What's up with the engine sludge?... scape by saddaddy

May 04, 2002 (10:09 am)

Well I think that is a question on a lot of people's minds. Why? It seems to me that you don't hear as much about it b/c folks realize that owners were more at fault than Toyota. Just MO. However, I think Yota is doing some sort of recall. Does not affect the first truck, though, I am pretty sure.
 
And not to stir up trouble, but your truck with an LSD can not go ANYWHERE a locked truck of any kind can. Maybe anywhere in the area you wheel. But, again, lift a tire and tell me what happens. I couldn't resist. Other than that, I am very happy you have had good luck with your truck. I think most people know that Rangers have good build quality, I do. However, Tacomas also have a great reputation in the same arena. That's one reason why this debate keeps going, both trucks are good.

#1033 of 1840 scape2 by plutonious

May 04, 2002 (10:32 am)

"You just go on believing what you want and justifying the extra 2-3K most Tacoma owners spent for that preceived reliability/quality advantage.."
 
What about styling and performance? IMHO, the Ranger is ugly and is always the underdog in any performance comparo with the Tacoma. I hate the fact that Rangers don't have headrests - I'm tall and want a headrest in case I get rear-ended. I think it's a joke that on every Ford truck, the shock absorber/bracket hangs well below the rear axle, vulnerable to damage. I think the Ranger's styling is juvenile, with that hood buldge and cheesy plastic molding on top of the bed rails...etc.
 
You should be comparing FX4s to non-TRD Tacomas, as they're similarly equipped and the price difference will probably be negligible. How can you compare any of the Ford Rangers to the TRD and say the Ranger is cheaper when Ford makes nothing like the TRD?

#1034 of 1840 scape2 by allknowing

May 04, 2002 (8:40 pm)

You know as well as I do that I haven't said that the Ford had poor quality. The Ranger is a great truck, however, it simply is still below the general quality level of the Tacoma. That's why the Ranger is never rated as good as the Tacoma in overall quality by any consumer publication. They do, however, rate the Ranger very well and I'll agree with that.
As for the alleged sludge problem, all I know is that it doesn't affect any Tacoma engine so I haven't bothered to research the issue.

Messages Page 104 of 185

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement