Last post on Oct 02, 2002 at 3:10 PM
You are in the Pickups - Archived Discussions
What is this discussion about?
Toyota Tacoma, Ford Ranger
Mar 05, 2002 (11:42 pm)
whats up bud. a little late to be up ain't it (for you)?
btw, no i do not consider a ranger older than '01 "buyable" for my tastes. but you also have to remember that the old 4.0 still had more torque than your 3.4 or whatever engine you have in your toy. the reason i say this is that i have been spoiled by the power of the SOHC 4.0. i had an explorer sport (1997) with this engine and my parents also have a '99 explorer sport with this engine. although the explorer powerplant feels a little more balsy than the ranger version (not by much), the power just can't be compared to anything in a small truck ive driven. my brother in law also had a '93 explorer sport (yep, at one point we had three sports in our family) with the old 4.0 in it, it just made noise and didn't go much of anywhere, but it did go 180K before he sold it. granted in '97, with the addition of the 5-spd. auto. tranny it made the old 4.0 pretty quick, but i would never buy any ford product with the old 4.0 in it. i just love the power of the SOHC. im not calling the older 4.0's junk, just not as powerful. and i doubt anyone who owns an old 4.0 would compare it to the new 4.0 for power. but remember, you still got more stuff standard on older rangers than you get with even new toyotas.
Mar 06, 2002 (7:11 am)
So what about Nissan then? How does that fit in your definition of a "nice" truck (considering you wanted to buy one, and was for a while trying to prove that it was also better than Taco).
As for downplaying: Heh, we are all masters of downplaying each others arguements. As for 4x4 sales decline? Hey, stang said himself that 1 month data didnt mean much, so why is he quoting it? Still, Tacoma had a sales growth in 2001, and thats important.
As for prices: 18K for a Ranger, and from what you said, sounds like 21K for Tacoma (I bought my TRD for 21K with everything I wanted (TRD, SR5, power. Don't believe me? Check the invoice price on 2002 4x4 V6 manual Taco with those packages).
With Ranger I'd have to start taking things OUT and selling them to get rid of all the junk I didnt want.
#571 of 1840 I'm the one who said
Mar 06, 2002 (10:39 am)
"If they wanted to buy a nice truck, they'd buy a Tacoma." By that I meant a truck that is built better, is more reliable, regardless of how many "niceties" come on it. With all honesty, I can think of about a dozen Ranger owners, who bought in the past couple of years, who said that they did recognize how much tighter and more well-made the Tacoma felt when they test drove it. They just didn't want to spend the extra money. So far that is, in fact, what I identify as you Ranger fans' best excuse: Is the extra quality worth the added expense? If it is, you spend the money on a truck that will last. If you just want to save a little money, sure, the Ranger is the truck for you. Just be sure that you'll have to live with lots of squeaks, recalls, and trips to the dealer. I don't. You know what? I'll concede this much: in alot of cases, the Ranger is the better "value." That DOES NOT make it the better truck.
Mar 06, 2002 (12:19 pm)
Scorp -"As far as cheap: you are destroying whole tbunders arguement line from before about how overpriced Tacomas are"
I guess you didn't read the part about "Of course if you ever want any options, the Tacoma quickly rises in price. " or the 82 dollar clock. Try pricing any nicely loaded truck, and match up the equipment. Tell me who costs more.
Anyways, this original statement of mine was directed towards Saddaddy's comment that Ranger's sales statistics area greatly boosted from fleet sales, because they are dirt cheap. Not so, when looking at MSRP prices.
One month because I'm showing you what's going on NOW with both respective vehicles. Seems less and less people are buying right now, (especially the pinacle of superiority, the Tacoma 4X4).
I'm just pointing out the innacurate data quoted by scoprio.
Sadpapa--->I don't know about the dealerships in your area, but in North Dallas, Tx, there are MANY more XLT's and Edges on the showroom floor than any XL's. Check out my above statements regarding your cheap or not cheaper statement. Tacoma's are cheaper in barebones. If you want a pickup with 4 wheels and a 2 doors, then you would save on the Tacoma (going off the manufacturers quotes). But if you want a decently optioned, or loaded compact truck, Ranger will have you out the door with less cash.
On paper, the Tacoma has the Toyota reputation for Quality. In real life, Rangers go just as far, and can do exactly the same if not more(and for less money).
Hey I got 100 Hp, but 10 years and 138k miles of service.
You don't know the difference between an impact socket and a rachet, then get a Tacoma. If you know how to maintain a vehicle, and like saving money, The Ranger will be your life long companion. This is true today because you get more of a truck, and a well built one at that.
"Is the extra quality worth the added expense?"
No. Especially considering the cheapo interior, seats, dash instruments, clock, and smaller everything.
I love arguments about trucks that last, when no one here owns a Tacoma as old as mine.
Mar 06, 2002 (12:30 pm)
My question to you would be, "What MAKES a better truck?" Fit & finish? That closing the door "feel"? How many useless options you can get for X dollars?
It seems to me like, what makes a "better" truck is whatever opinion we have about our respective trucks.
I was shopping for a compact, x-cab 4x4 truck about a year ago. I drove both the Taco & the Ranger. Both w/ V-6, 5-spd. manual etc. etc. Here's what I gathered:
The Ranger seemed to be more solid in fit & finish (doors closing, hood, tailgate, etc.) It also had a better highway ride. I drive 80 miles back & forth to work every day, so this matters to me. V-6 power was decent. Seats were comfortable. Visibility was good, and the seating position was comfortable to me for commuting.
The Taco's fit & finish were good, but it didn't seem to have the solid feel the Ranger had. Highway ride was nominal (tolerable), but the V-6's power "seemed" to be a little better through the whole powerband. (it was smoother also) The seats left a little to be deisred, but they wern't enough to discourage a purchase. However, the seats were a little too close to the floor for me. I could live with this as well if I had to.
What this all boils down to is which one I liked better. After all the haggling over price, there was less than $750 difference between the 2 trucks. The trucks were optioned as close to one another as they could get.
I was dead set on the Taco. I thought it looked better, handled better, felt smoother at speed on the interstate, etc. etc.
What did I buy? Well, after all was said & done, I came across a used, low-mileage F/S Silverado 4x4, & made the mistake of looking at it & driving it. I couldn't have bought a truck better suited to my needs. No, the gas mileage isn't as good as a small truck. Its a regular cab, so its easier to park downtown. Its easier to get around in the woods, too. If I had to do it again, I don't think I'd even consider a small truck. I guess its all in how you look at it.
Mar 06, 2002 (1:10 pm)
talk about a tricky ending to a suspenseful story. :o)
#575 of 1840 Haha, what do you mean tbunder?
Mar 06, 2002 (2:45 pm)
Keith, I will say this. You obviously care nothing for longevity or quality (which was my main point). I see this from your buying a Chevy. I love em to death but Rangers and Tacos are much better in that arena. To refute me you should have first read some of the Ford guys' points. They seem to hold the award for having the most useless options for X dollars. Tacos' options are fewer and much more necessary than alot of Ranger options. Ask tbunder, mp3 player, disc changer, and other stuff. Granted they are nice, but they are things that, if I bought, would be aftermarket for sure. Who would trust an mp3 player made by any normal car manufacturer? An idiot. I mean these are trucks, what do you want a navigation system?
As for the rest of your claims of solidity, you're truly one in a million.
You were exactly right about "what makes a better truck is what we like in a particular truck." I agree, thats why I try not to argue as aggressively as some. I love my Taco, but still think just about any 3/4 ton truck is "better" just cuz of what it can do. They are TRUCKS.
However, the biggest current debate here has to do with the Ranger being so much cheaper, and I was just trying to give my best excuse for that. I honestly think that Tacos are a little better/solidly made. Old, though the interior may be, it is from what I have hear, the better made of the two as far as quality. I have not had the first squeak, and I spend lots of miles on washboarded gravel roads. Oh well, this is entirely too long and I have wasted lots of time. Take it EZ guys!!!
Mar 06, 2002 (4:14 pm)
you are one of the few people i enjoy reading around here. so many people have such strong "opinions" or they think they have to defend their purchase, or they know inside that their truck ISNT as good and so they try to OVER promote it, despite fact. i am a journalism student and i have written for a couple newspapers and i know what bias is. so what i did in buying my truck was remove the bias and try to buy what was going to serve me best, in reality. well i decided that Tacoma is probably better. but guess what, its not like it goes 100k more than anything else on the road, this is 2002....just about ANY car can go 150k. and who really keeps their vehicles longer than that? i am not going to, in all likelihood. i bought the ranger because i think its better looking, was more comfortable, i got a good price, and it has some good power. my family owns fords and toyotas and i honestly havent seen much difference over the years. the toyotas may have an edge, but its not like they were flawless and we had to fix the fords every day or something. i am proud of my truck but i dont like it so much that i let it distort my reality. i dont kiss it in the morning and i dont defend it against fact. i save my affections for my fiancee. and my ranger takes me to work every day, just like a tacoma would.
Mar 06, 2002 (4:50 pm)
I go over board some I think, but I try to keep my head on straight. One question: What's wrong with kissing your truck in the morning? LOL, guess its easy to see that I need a girl, huh? J/k, about the kissing part. I really do need a girl. TRUCKS rule. Have a good one!
Mar 06, 2002 (5:30 pm)
i didnt say there was anything wrong with it, i just said i dont. lol
but i keep an open mind, so one of these days if its looking sexy...well, as trucks go anyway...lol