Talk me out of getting a Ranger!

dang, this thread is still goin?

 

There's nothing wrong with refinement, but the Tacoma doesn't need to be refined. That's what the Lexus brand is for.

 

The point is that people are confusing the 2, often leading to the misrepresentation that the Tacoma is unreliable. And as for refinement of the 3rd gens, it’s way more refined than the 1st and 2nd gen were upon release and through the model years. As I’ve noticed on TacomaWorld often, it seems like folks will complain about everything these day, an then automatically associate that with the Tacoma being a poor truck.

 

I've found that refinement is a trade off because this refinement came at a the cost of quality and reliability.


I think people are looking for reliability from the features that are most likely to fail like electronics.



What about people confusing luxury with quality?

 

What. How can he put on 400k in (max) 4 years?

 

Runs a small fleet service doing HVAC, electrical, handyman, and pest control services along with safety mitigation/inspection in western Arizona towns/mines and in and in areas north of Vegas. He’s not home all that much, but when he is there’s a small trailer he’s towing or a bed loaded down with contractor boxes. One vehicle usually stays at home and also see normal vehicle use while the other is gone.

 

Not so much luxury, but refinement in general. Whistling sounds from LCAs, gear hunting, squeaky leaf spring. Basically quirks that may be annoying, but are relatively easy to fix that don’t affect the longevity or reliability of the vehicle. Those aren’t big deals to me, but there’s pages of people whining about them on here.

 

What more could you possibly ask for?

 

Its a Ford...

 

A) It's a completely different truck. Sure, the components are similar to a lot of the tried and true stuff, but they aren't the same. The 3.5 in the Tacoma is the first generation of the 2GR-FKS. Again, I'm not saying it's not a reliable engine, nor am I disputing Toyota's reputation as a company. Toyota is my favorite of all the "foreign" manufacturers of both cars and trucks. I'd love to get my hands on a Supra. My point is that, while I have no reason to think it's UNreliable, I also have no proof that it's as bulletproof as people suggest. Carcomplaints.com doesn't indicate much advantage in reliability over other manufacturers (sans GM).

B) Merely being "adequate" is not something a company like Toyota should be striving for. There have been several occasions in which I wished for four wheel disks, and I've only had the truck for a few months.

C) Only two models of the Tacoma are Off-Road trucks. The base 4x4 Ranger is every bit as capable off road as the SR5 and Sport Tacoma. They each excel in different aspects, but in the big picture, neither is bred as more of an off road rig than the other.

 

They’re the same exact trucks. They both use gas. Change my mind.

 

HaHa...I know several women that see vehicles in that way. LOL

 

I’m sorry, but this just isn’t true and the original post you quoted already explained way. The on paper features might be the same, but the little details are where the difference is. Look at the Colorado ZR2 - it’s an off road beast on paper with the ground clearance of a Honda Passport.

 

The 2GR family has been around for years with zero standout reliability issues. The slight variance in the dual injection system which have also been tried and true for years have also shown zero reliability issues across all models implementing it. There’s plenty of proof that the 2GR-FKS and the other 2GR series motors are indeed highly reliable. Carcomplaints.com doesn’t take into account the class action lawsuit GM is facing over the transmission in the Colorado/canyon, or the electrical issues, or the common issues that appear 3+ years down the road. These issues simply don’t exist in a large scale on Tacomas. Rarely have I ever seen an actual transmission fail on a Tacoma.

Adequate is plenty fine when sales show that the Tacoma is dominating. Most people who complain about the drums have never even touched drum brakes. In my 3 Tacomas I’ve never had to once touch them for maintenance. 1st gen had 295k, 2nd gen 205k, and 3rd gen 29k. I’ve never had a situation in the over half million miles, where I thought that disk brakes would matter substantially. That’s with regular towing, hauling, and off-roading.

If you want a truck that’s state of the art and modern, why anyone would choose a Toyota is beyond me. Tacoma owners typically buy there trucks to keep them for years without much trouble, not so they can cheat on their spouse with the service advisor and mechanic at their local dealership.

 

I saw my first super cab ranger the other day, white with blacked out everything else. I gotta say it actually looked good, while the bed still looks kinda weird it has much better proportions than the crew cab.

 

Ford needs to bring the Ranger Raptor to US shores. That would make me trade. However, as it stands. The ranger looks more pedestrian than a Colorado.

 

That post I quoted states aproach, departure, breakover, ground clearance, shock towers, and sidewalls. None of those are significantly better on the taco than the Ranger. The angles are all within half a degree except break over, which favors the ranger. They both have trash tires for off road with similar sidewalls. The shock mounts might be marginally better, but I'd have to get under to measure for sure. The taco only has .5 inches better ground clearance. There is no significant difference between the two that favors the tacoma for off roading on paper or otherwise. The post also says the taco is an off road truck first with luxuries added on certain trims, which is flat out wrong. The tacoma is a light utility truck with luxuries added in the (significantly pricier) off road trims. If a bare bones off roader is what you want, the ranger is a WAY better option. An off road trim taco can't be had for less than upper 30s because it includes a bunch of luxuries. You can add the FX4 package to the base model Ranger XL for low 30s.

Also, I'm not including the GM competition because I don't know dick about them. The YouTube seems to shed a fairly favorable light on the ZR2 though. It looks pretty capable.

The Atkinson aspect is the part that is unproven, and the 2GR family has mostly been transversely mounted afaik. Like I've said multiple times now, I'm not saying its unreliable, but you have no proof that it is. Saying the 2GR FKS is reliable based on other engines in the 2GR family is akin to comparing the 3.5 ecoboost in The Taurus to the one in The Raptor. They are the same family, but there are a lot of differences. The 2.3 ecoboost in the ranger is the same family as the 2.0 ecoboost. Same family, but a completely different engine for a different application.

I excluded GM from that example because the Colorado is more or less a lemon as far as I can tell. That's what I meant by "sans GM."

Adequate IS acceptable, but it should be priced accordingly. If you're paying the same amount of money, who would knowingly choose the inferior option? For a vehicle that is apparently an "off road vehicle first and foremost," you'd think you'd want the brakes that are better off road, ie: disks. Drums are cheaper and last longer, but disks are better in every single other aspect.

If you want a truck that uses 15-20 year old tech, why anyone would pay modern state of the art money is beyond me. People get conned into doing it, though, because Top Gear dropped one off a building once. Myself included.

I know this next part will ruffle some feathers, but what fun would a debate be without a ruffled feather or two.

I had high hopes for my Tacoma. The reputation had me expecting some sort of trucky god. I mean, it certainly looks rugged and more than capable. However, with the exception of my beat to shit 69 F100 with a bad lift kit, this truck is the first vehicle of many that has actually disappointed me. I love the Terrain Control, but so much of the rest of the truck is just... mediocre. It sounds weird to say, but Ford has spoiled me. The ecoboost power delivery. Four door keyless entry. Remote start. Rear seat outlets. Intuitive volume and tuning controls on the steering wheel.... the list goes on. My buddy was laughing at how much my lawn mower squished my suspension. I'm still happy with my taco truck, but for 40 grand, I expected to be happier.

 

Do you even Google...wtf, I’m embarrassed for you.

 

So the hundreds of thousands of Tacomas on the roads right now with 3.5s for the past 4 years haven’t proven any hint of reliability? See my other post about the guy with 2 of them with cumulative mileage of almost 400k. There’s also plenty of other examples here and elsewhere. For a 4 year old truck and drivetrain setup, there’s been zero mass reliability issues with the 2GR-FKS. If the engine had issues, they’d have shown by now, as there’s been a broad spectrum of mileage amongst hundred of thousands of trucks. The Atkinson cycle has been used plenty long on other engines and has been adopted to other engines with no reported issues. If there were extensive problems, they’d have already been noted. Not sure what more you want in terms of proof. Not trying to sound like a fanboy either, but the numbers are there. In fact the tried and true 1GR-FE in the second gens had more problems upon release and through the first couple years. Still turned out to be a great engine.

As for me personally, I got my 17 TRDOR 6MT for $30k with only 9k miles on it, and came out well ahead of its value. I also didn’t solely buy my truck based on brakes, especially when they’re a non-factor for most. Not a hot topic item for me. The rest of the truck has always been as updated as any of the other Toyota lineup. The rest of the technology I can personally do without, and would opt out of it anyways. Toyota has always been conservative with implementing technology, and as a previous owner of 2 other Toyota trucks, and with over 600k miles in my Toyota vehicles, I don’t expect flashy rigs. Different strokes for different folks. I needed a simple truck with average power and a manual transmission, that can get me and my party safely through mountains and the backcountry. It does so perfectly. I don’t need a red light racer with fancy tech and bells and whistles that will eventually cost an arm and leg to repair. I can do 95% of the preventative maintenance on my Tacoma without ever having to step into a service department. In my regular outings, you’d be surprised how many new vehicles I’ve found stranded in the backcountry with overly complicated issues.

 

Y'all expect too much from a truck. Any new car is an expensive purchase, and we all want perfection, but it just doesn't exist. Its a mass produced machine thats better than most but certainly not without its flaws.

I compared Ranger to Tacoma before my purchase; test drove both. The outcome was not close for me: Tacoma the better truck hands down.