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-- see logJsError57.html for a stack trace discussion.

What is this discussion about? Toyota Tacoma, Ford Ranger

Messages Page 114 of 185

#1129 of 1840 tbunder, can you take scape2 with you please? by plutonious

May 11, 2002 (11:16 pm)

Ditto saddaddy's comments, scape2. You haven't explained how your LSD helps you tow, haul or pull. I don't see many people's tires "peeling out" and losing traction when they tow, haul or pull, except for maybe on a slick boat ramp when pulling a boat. The locker is even better than the LSD in that situation.
 
Just curious, isn't the non-TRD Tacoma available with an LSD anyways? Pick which one you want, then!
 
What's my four-wheeling experience? Well, the very fact that you ask what class of trails I drive on tells me you're a recreational offroader. I don't four-wheel for fun, for me, it's part of life. For almost 10 years I've been through the worst, roughest, flooded, dilapidated "streets" in Mexico, and my truck spends 90% of its time on ranches in south central Mexico which resembles a jungle more than anything. There's no way you can convince me a LSD is better for climbing up a muddy, caliche, bumpy hill than a locker. If you want to classify what I've been driving in the last decade, be my guest.
 
Stang: "but the 1998 model 4.0L Ranger has about 47 less horsepower than the current 4.0l"
 
Wow, so in 1998 the Ford 4.0 was only making about 160 horses, while the Toyota 3.4 was making 190? It's taken Ford 8 years to make a 4.0 outperform Toyota's 3.4? And it only outperforms it by 17 horses? Is that really something to be proud of?

#1130 of 1840 I will say this again by scape2

May 12, 2002 (7:34 am)

A locker is better for offroading, better than an LSD.
But, how often will the average person use this locker? Maybe 2% of their total driving time? A locker is only supposed to be used in extreme conditions. Most people don't even know when to use thier locker or how to use thier locker. a limited slip diff has much more use and function for the everyday user. The locker is normally an OPEN axle, do you not understand what this means? Its funny how some will beat thier chests about offroad ability. Yet stats show over 90 percent of 4x4 vehicles barely even see a gravel road. The Ranger offers a nice ride for city streets, yet give you the aiblity to visit your natiional forests, parks.
plut.. made my point.. I use my RAnger in the Cacade Mountains.. MT Hood, MT St. Helens, Jefferson, 3 sisters.. look them up on a map. I have also been into the Tillamook National Forest area, Coast Ranges of Oregon/Washington. I have been to Lions Back/Utah/Nevada and rock climbed with Jeepers on many occasions(not my Ranger).
The Ranger is a capaple truck, just as capable as a Toyota. Toyota trucks don't come with some magic potion for offroading. 1998?? Why are we going back into the past? The new 4.0 will out pull/perform/haul the 3.4 in the Toyota. You have to rev the heck out of the Toyota to get any power. The Torque/HP curve on the Ranger is much more aggressive and truck like.

#1131 of 1840 Plut by midnight_stang

May 12, 2002 (10:24 am)

"It's taken Ford 8 years to make a 4.0 outperform Toyota's 3.4? And it only outperforms it by 17 horses? Is that really something to be proud of?"
 
It's important if you like to drag race stock compact pickup trucks. But even you were bragging how the 1998 Tacoma could out accelerate a Ranger. Maybe it's time for a retest? Even you should understand the difference of 30% extra peak horsepower.
 
You also forgot that the Ford 4.0l has more torque in either model, clearly a product of it's extra cubic inches. You also forget (or don't know) what a Torque curve (or lack thereof) does for a vehicle on the street with a payload or not. You see peak numbers. I see peak numbers at more truck specific RPM's. I also am a bit familair with the properties of 2valve and 4 valve applications in relations to low, midrange and high-end power production, and of course what good ole cubic inches (no matter how refined you think it is) relates to great power once you leave idle RPM. Someday you won't be as pushy thinking one truck absolutely rules the other in all categories. Either way it's time for a modern comparison, that realizes both pro and cons.
 
" I don't see many people's tires "peeling out" and losing traction when they tow, haul or pull,"
 
That's true, except when you are driving home and it rains. If you are towing an ATV, or two motorcycles in a trailer, and it starts to pour, which would you rather have to help you take that curvy on-ramp onto the highway? A locker or a Limited Slip Differential? Both have it's applications. Locker for off-roading, Limited Slip for anything with a turn involved.
 
"For almost 10 years I've been through the worst, roughest, flooded, dilapidated "streets" in Mexico"
 
Wow, that's pretty cool for a 1998 truck that you had owned since 1992.

#1132 of 1840 You're blind or deaf one: by saddaddy

May 12, 2002 (11:25 am)

Most people don't need a locker, most people this and that.
 
MOST people don't buy the offroad package.
MOST people that buy the offroad package want an off road truck.
MOST people who buy an offroad package want their truck to excel in that arena more than street racing, handling, and towing.
 
Why is that so tough to understand?

#1134 of 1840 Again, ditto saddaddy's comments by plutonious

May 12, 2002 (1:46 pm)

stang, I have to put on my waders to read through your BS everytime you post. BLAH BLAH you and your torque curves. What good are they when in the REAL WORLD the Tacoma outperformed the Ranger in every performance test, despite the Ranger's torque advangtage?
 
Don't even say the the new Ranger outperforms the Tacoma until they go head to head in a comparison.
 
As far as your knowledge of 2 and 4 valve engines go...do you know that Toyota pioneered the variable intake manifold concept and that it eliminated the lack of low end grunt associated with 4 valve engines?
 
But your dumbest statement is "For almost 10 years I've (meaning me) been through the worst, roughest, flooded, dilapidated "streets" in Mexico. Wow, that's pretty cool for a 1998 truck that you had owned since 1992"
 
Did it ever occur to you I was in Mexico long before I bought my truck??????????????????????

#1135 of 1840 Look at the tempers raise... by midnight_stang

May 12, 2002 (3:34 pm)

Pluto and Sadddaddy. I am so sorry to upset you both on the touchy subject of Tacoma vs Ranger.. Didn't mean to bruise your ego's...
 
"MOST people don't buy the offroad package.
MOST people that buy the offroad package want an off road truck.
MOST people who buy an offroad package want their truck to excel in that arena more than street racing, handling, and towing. "
 
1st point I'll agree.
2nd Point, may or may not be true. A lot of TRD and 4X4 decals never leave the payment.
3rd point sure, people want their truck to excel in everything, but I don't see how an off-road package directly relates to towing.
 
I'm talking real world, always active traction help. You're talking about the few seconds a boat is pulled up a wet ramp, or the ultimate off-roading situation. I also was making fun of drag racing a stock compact truck.
 
"What good are they when in the REAL WORLD the Tacoma outperformed the Ranger in every performance test, despite the Ranger's torque advangtage?"
 
Are we talking the out-dated 1998 performance test, or a current year one?
 
"do you know that Toyota pioneered the variable intake manifold concept and that it eliminated the lack of low end grunt associated with 4 valve engines?"
 
I guess they "pioneered" it before the old 160 horse 4.0l? Because they had them too.
 
"But your dumbest statement is "For almost 10 years I've (meaning me) been through the worst, roughest, flooded, dilapidated "streets" in Mexico. Wow, that's pretty cool for a 1998 truck that you had owned since 1992""
 
Ok, so you were talking about off-roading. But how did the Tacoma exist "since 1992".

#1136 of 1840 Puleeeeze... by plutonious

May 12, 2002 (5:17 pm)

"A lot of TRD and 4X4 decals never leave the payment."
 
And a lot do. Like mine, for example. Who cares anyways? Most people who buy a Corvette won't drive it at 150mph, and most people who buy a Land Rover aren't going to take it on an African safari. But you don't hear people saying that a Miata and a Subaru AWD are just as good as a Corvette and Land Rover because the latter most likely aren't going to be used to their potential. Lame-o- argument there!
 
"3rd point sure, people want their truck to excel in everything, but I don't see how an off-road package directly relates to towing"
 
What? The TRD's heavier duty suspension handles the rigors of hauling and towing better than the standard suspension. That one should have been obvious! Why do you think an F-350 has a heavier duty suspension than an F-250? Better towing and hauling, maybe? Anybody home?
 
"Are we talking the out-dated 1998 performance test, or a current year one?"
 
Well, the current Ranger only has 17 more horses than the 1998 Ranger. Is the 17 horses really going to give the Ranger a land-side victory over the Tacoma, assuming it even beats it? How is that going to help the Ranger dethrone the Tacoma in braking, suspension performance and off-roading?
 
And once again: Ford's taking 8 years to make a 4.0 finally outperform (and only by 17 horses) Toyota's 3.4 should be a source of embarrasment, not bragging.
 
"I guess they "pioneered" it (variable intake manifold) before the old 160 horse 4.0l? Because they had them too."
 
Nice try. The 4.0 is a SOHC design, not a DOHC 4 valve design. Toyota developed the variable intake manifold to eliminate the lack of low end grunt in DOHC 4 valve engines. How could Ford have done the same if they don't have any DOHC engines - at least in mainstream truck applications?
 
"Ok, so you were talking about off-roading. But how did the Tacoma exist "since 1992"
 
I don't even know what you're trying to say with that. Your assumptions are making you look like a, well, you know...
 
And finally: IF YOU DON'T CARE THAT MUCH ABOUT OFF-ROADING, DON'T GET THE TRD! GET THE REGULAR 4X4 WHICH IS MORE COMPARABLE TO THE RANGER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!GOT IT????????

#1137 of 1840 TRD package by eagle63

May 12, 2002 (6:21 pm)

Actually I would guess Stang is right: most TRD's never leave the pavement. (maybe a gravel road) But a big part of this problem is simply availability and marketing. Here in MN, virtually every 4x4 tacoma you see on a dealer's lot is equipped with the TRD package. You have to special order the truck without it if you don't want it. For that reason, many people who probably normally wouldn't choose the TRD end up getting it because it's not worth the hassle and the wait to order one. I don't know if this is typical in other parts of the country or not. And of course, there's always a percentage of buyers who will get the off-road package simply for the look and "macho" aspect of it.

#1138 of 1840 Maybe times have changed by plutonious

May 12, 2002 (6:29 pm)

I bought mine in 1998 in San Antonio, TX and at that time the TRD was hard to come by. I believe that was the first year the TRD was introduced and I'm sure that had something to do with it. Thinking back, it did take me a while to find what I was looking for. My truck's basically loaded except it has the manual transmission, not a popular combo I guess.

Messages Page 114 of 185

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement