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
Apr 11, 2002 (8:52 pm)
Interesting link. In 1999, the average repair costs of the Ranger were more than six times the average of the Tacoma. It also shows that the Ranger is only a bit below the average mark for repairs while the Tacoma was over 6.5 times below the average in repair cost. How many studies and surveys do we need to demonstrate that the Tacoma is superior in quality to the Ranger? It's obvious!! Mr. stang, tbunder, scape2??? Is this just another biased source? The Ranger is a good truck but it's clearly got a way to go to get close to Toyota's general quality.
#859 of 1840 Since this link was posted in two forums, here's my analysis
Apr 12, 2002 (4:58 am)
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.
Apr 12, 2002 (9:33 am)
Give me a break stang. You're too intelligent of a guy to resort to "politician type" excuses like that. I like the Ranger too, however, my experience of owning both the Ford and the Toyota supports the quality superiority of the Tacoma that most (if not all) publications conclude. I'm obviously not alone in my finding. There's too much supporting evidence to the contrary to take your point of view.
#861 of 1840 I don't know why
Apr 12, 2002 (9:53 am)
stang doesn't just simply posts links saying the Ranger is better. Perhaps lack of such information is the reason?
Apr 12, 2002 (11:41 am)
OK, Since EDMUNDS wants to limit words to 115 Characters (which sucks), Goto WWW.AUTOVANTAGE.COM
Under Car Buying and Research, Select Ford or Toyota, select "New Car Summary", and then check it out.
The Tacoma gets a "Recommended" label,
The Ranger gets a "Best Buy" label.
And I Agree.
Can we all be friends now?
#864 of 1840 ak & stang: My $.02
Apr 12, 2002 (12:31 pm)
If one is interested in ONLY reliability and/or 4-wheeling when considering which small truck to buy, then by all means, they should buy a Tacoma.
However, if one is willing to put up with the "potential" for a few additional problems, wants to save a boatload of money, and wishes a better "all-around" small truck, then they should seriously consider the Ranger.
In addition, there are a multitude of subjective differences that IMHO, favor the Ranger. Some day I'll list those.
Of course, this might be all BS, but don't forget, I have owned TWO Tacomas prior to buying the new Ranger, which so far has been trouble-free.
#865 of 1840 rick and stang
Apr 12, 2002 (1:00 pm)
I agree completely with both of you.
#866 of 1840 where's........
Apr 12, 2002 (1:11 pm)
pluto about now. he asked for it, stang delivered.
Apr 12, 2002 (3:06 pm)
With all due respect, I don't see the value in your links. The first one didn't post anything about the Tacoma and said something about the S-10 winning their "athletic" award. The second link about loyalty IMHO is worthless because historically people who own Toyotas keep them for the long haul and don't buy new Toyotas every year or two.. Ford owners seem to buy and trade in their vehicles frequently which would account for Ford's "loyalty" rating. And the third even said you can't buy a tougher truck than the Tacoma.
So at best, your links are very subjective. In objective comparison tests, the Tacoma has proven to outperform the Ranger time and again.