Ranger or Tacoma

[Ranger Sport Honduras]

siged

dude im gonna start charging u!!
at least im famous lol

 

[adsm08]

Yeah, but you are coming up with some good ones lately.

 

[Ranger Sport Honduras]

Yeah, but you are coming up with some good ones lately.

yeah i think my sarcasm is growing lol

 

[Frank The Tank]

If you just want a comfortable stock truck.... I'd go with an 04+ (well, I did) they ride well have a lot of options, my 4.0 avg 22mpg on hwy before i lifted it and did gears and wheels and tires..... now it's more like 17. but it's solid, I tow with it daily and the pushbutton 4x4 is convenient.
I like the ride, and the styling, these trucks are very underestimated, and not given the credit for durabilty they deserve.

If your into lifting or offroading, I'd get a pre-97 4x4 manual.......... with a 4.0.

the 3.0 lasts forever but that is because they are so slow they can't get to the end of their usable life-span.
If you leave it stock, and do scheduled maintenance, no reason you can't get 300k miles out of it (i have 235k on my 97)

Frank

 

[Sevensecondsuv]

185,000 miles on my 1992 explorer (which is ranger with an SUV body). No major problems, just regular maintenance. It runs perfectly, get's good mileage, goes anywhere. It's been my daily driver for seven years.

265,000 miles on my 1990 Ranger. The 2.3 4 banger still ran perfect at 250,000 when I took it out, rebuilt it, and put a turbo on it for it's quarter million mile birthday. 15,000 miles later it'll now out-accelerate any new turdyota anything.

The ranger chassis is simply the best there is in any compact truck. The chassis shares a lot of parts and design with the bigger class-leading F-series trucks. The powertrains are superbly reliable when maintained, and even without maintenance will put up with abuse. I don't know why taco's sell for more (it probably has something to do with toyota's completely overblown reputation that is now unraveling as we speak) because the Ranger is simply a better truck. Not that the taco's are bad trucks by any means, the Ranger is just that great of a truck.

Like everyone else is saying, Rangers are seriously underestimated by most people. I've seen lots of these little trucks live through stuff that killed lesser half tons. It really can't be explained with words just how tuff Rangers are. It's just something you have to experience by owning one. Sometimes they seem more like tractors than trucks.

Don't pay attention to what the stupid auto reviews say about the ranger. They're more interested in seeing a new dash layout than how a truck holds up over a half million miles.

I don't know what kind of truck you're looking for, but if you want a 4x4, definately get a V6, specifically a 4.0 if you plan to pull stuff. For every day comuting and putting crap in the bed, the 2wd 4-bangers can't be beat. They get better mileage than any of the competition and are probably the most reliable, maintenance free ranger engines. Don't be scared of hauling with a 4-cylinder either, they're tuff little engines and you won't hurt one, it'll just be slow going.

 

[Original_Ranger84]

Look for a 2.9 or a 4.0, they are the better engines, although the 3.0 is sturdy too. 3.0 vs 2.9/4.0 is a long standing debate in the Ranger community.

And then there are the lowly 2.8L defenders... You won't be dissapointed with any engine you get in these trucks but try to stick to manual opitions like he said, Automatic ones break (not just on rangers but everything) not to mention manuals are simple and cheap to repair.

Since you're going 4WD, I'd make sure that whatever your model year you get, it has the 4.0. Pre-2001 you get the OHV Cologne V6 4.0, later than that you get the Ford Explorer SOHC 4.0 V6. Either one's cool in a way. Definitely skip the 3.0.

Why skip the 3.0L? Everyone says the 4.0L is sooooooo awesome compare to the 3.0L but I have driven 4.0L and honestly not too terribly impressed. My 2.8 had more balls. And the 3.0L is just as sporty with a 5 speed behind it. Not to mention I can pull an average of 20 in town and 25 Highway with 31's and 3.73 gearing.

bsides tacoma seats are like wood benches
the Ranger has a better, nicer and comfortable interior
something u wont regret while driving long trips

1+ The seats on these truck are NICE! I can sit for like 6+ hour drives and not feel bad after I got out. Hard to say with any of the other vehicles my parents own... they never understood why i preferred the gas wasting truck over my dads saturn till they drove to anchorage with me.

Have you been in a late model Tacoma? I know you haven't.

Yes and the are crap IMO. my friend has one and she likes it but my back hurt. and the ride sucked... it was like they stuffed cardboard between the fabric and the cusions.

Oh and both trucks I have are extremely reliable... my old 84's going on 450,000 miles now with regular maintainance and a trans rebuild (only cause a roll pin got reused and fell out)

 

[Jason]

here we go again...
hes looking for used cheap trucks so Ranger seats are better

anyway what u doing here? this is not Tacoma station

I won't ignore comments made out of ignorance with no real point of reference. It's not moron station either but people talk like them often.

And I noticed with your not-so-whitty response that you didn't answer. That's because I am right. we already know.

 

[Sevensecondsuv]

Here's the biggest problem with the Tacomas, seems toyoder couldn't even figure out how get a frame to last 15 years...

 

[Jason]

That someone bent one?

 

[Sevensecondsuv]

That someone bent one?

Not just one, lot's of 'em! Those are just the first two pictures to pop up in google images on my 3 second search.

If they can't even keep the frame from rusting in half...

 

[recklessabandonman]

How do you even do that?

 

[Jason]

Simple. They sourced a US company to treat the steel. That's what they got. Alot like f-150 bed sides and Bronco tailgates.

 

[Frank The Tank]

America is dumb, down with all vehicles made in america........

yeah, err..... where is this going? I'm glad Ford got some well made japanese frames though (so that means the Ranger is still better)

Frank

 

[Ranger Sport Honduras]

I won't ignore comments made out of ignorance with no real point of reference. It's not moron station either but people talk like them often.

And I noticed with your not-so-whitty response that you didn't answer. That's because I am right. we already know.

i have tried the new tacomas interior, not worth to mention imo
do me a favor, dont quote/reply to any thing i post
and i wont do it to u
i may look like a moron, but hey im not the one prefering a tacoma on a ranger forum
thats like going to BK and ordering wendys
on subject:
like posted above the 4 bangers are really tuff engines, u may go slow whit heavy loads, but u will get there.
200k miles? not a problem for them
just stay with manual trans and do regular maintenance

 

[Sevensecondsuv]

...like f-150 bed sides and Bronco tailgates.

I'm sorry, but most of us here realize that there are slightly different ramifications to having a few rust holes in the wheel arches than having the frame rust in two. Besides, I see a lot more toyotas with rusty wheel arches than fords around here.

The problem was the shape of toyotas frame section. That is why toyota truck frames rust in half and ford truck frames dont.