Got sorta inspired by the focus thread, so i started this one. Who here honestly thinks that a toyota pick-up truck is better then any ford truck, i mean any one of the same year/class. example, ford ranger against tacoma? What are the strong weak pionts of these vehicles.

Also for those who think this is a troll, its not.

 

Comparing the Tundra to the F-150 in the 4 door trucks. The F-150 is a lot more gentle. Rides better, better ergonomics, easier to get in and out of. The Tundra has better interior materials like their seats don't stain with pure water like the F-150. The interior room goes to the F-150 although the rear seat setup is still moronish at best- kindly have the seats fold flat like the older F-150's. In the engine department, Toyota is still trying to catch Ford. The I-Force engine is a stable little motor but drinks far too much gas for the power output. In the transmission department, the Tundra is miles ahead of Ford as well as the rear axle. Both of those departments, Ford is dead last. Accessory items are pretty much a dead even call. Most of those are a personal preference call.
Comparing the Taco to the Ranger. The Ranger is very dated. There really is no comparison as the Taco is a midsize truck verus a small truck. The Taco has a modern high output V6 whereas the ranger 4.0 is still at the bottom of the heap and should have been replaced years ago. The Taco has a 5 speed auto available with all engines that is not an option for the Ranger. The Taco is miles ahead in the interiors and available options but lets be realistic, the Taco can run into the $30,000 range whereas a decently equipped Ranger is most commonly available for half that. Dollar for dollar though, the Ranger is still a great truck for the bucks and has a long successful reliabilty record.
For me, there isn't a Toyota made that I want. It costs far too much to maintain one. When the new Tundra comes out, I expect for it to be a major gas guzzler like the Titan. Great to have all of that horspower- if you can afford to feed it. My old 04 SCrew has 54,000 miles on her. It hasn't been trouble free but it has never left me on the side of the road either. Most any repairs, while not cheap, are fairly reasonable. Toyota is noted for being very expensive to fix. Don't think I'll have a Toyoyta.

 

They made the 4.0 single overhead cam though, nows its pretty much a new motor. If i was to look at a 97 ranger, to a the new 03 rangers engine, i prolly couldnt spot many commons in both of them. Look at jeeps 4.0 i-six motor, which hasnt gone under any change sence it was first started.

Like the 2.8 was remade to the 2.9, which was then remade to the 3.0 . the 4.0 has gone under similar changes, just not with size

 

I'd take an '89-'95 toyota P/U over the ranger with the same stuff.

I currently own a '91 toyota p/u for a dd, and I looked at rangers of the same year and I didn't like what I saw.

Of course, the old addage goes for the older (70s-95) toyotas, "its a Toyota" they're known to go forever.

 

Don't start getting people confused. The 2.hate, 2.9L and 3.slow aren't the same engine. The 3.slow is it's own family, period, from the FWD cars. The other two v6s are loosely related, but few, if any, parts swap over. The 2.9 and 4.0L are much more related.

The OHC 4.0L is newer, but it will nickel and dime you to death, in my opinion, and really wasn't ahead of the game powerwise when it came out.

 

You ask for a difficult comparison, because I don't think the 2 companies are trying to market or make their vehicles to cater to the same market.

It would be like trying to compare apples to pineapples. Doesn't really work.

Ranger is a small trucks that is low cost. Like a previous poster said, the Tacoma is a midsized truck that can get up there in terms of cost. Different markets.

Tundra appeals to people who actually do not want a full sized truck but want a 7/8ths full sized truck. Not enough payload and towing capacity really for a serious work truck, but can be used to move the occasional fridge.

F150 is available in many combinations to satisfy almost anybody, from grocery getters to contractors, moms and construction workers. You can't get that in a Tundra.

Again, difficult comparison to make, since they are totally different beasts.

 

I never sed the 2.8 ,2.9 ,3.0 are the SAME motor, just that the 2.8 was then remade to the 2.9, which included an entirely new fuel system, re desinged heads, and a new valvetrian and other stuff. And the 3.0 has it own changes from the 2.9. That doesnt mean parts are going to have to swap over to each motor.

Look at the order they came in, 2.8 which was the start of the light truck mid size engine....then the 2.9 which was an improvment over the 2.8, but still in the same class the 2.8 is in, and after that the 3.0 is fords newest version of the light truck mid-size engine. There all the same engine class, all are just different versions of genrally the same motor choice. Whic backs up my statement that the 2.8 was re made to be that 2.9, which then was re made to be the 3.0. Dont tell me the 3.0 came from the car engine 3.0, i beleave the 3.0 that was in the rangers, was what was used to make a motor for the ford tourus and cars alike being that the rnager is what it was first used in.

 

Check the Tacoma boards. What a great idea it was to put a plastic bed in them, then refuse to warrany them when someone throws a log thru one, and it shatters like glass at 20 below.
Pure Genius, that.
Can't beat that Toyota quality. I see it shining thru the rust holes of so many.

 

the toyota engines were known to go forever, not the bodies.

150k is like a breakin period for an old toyota 4banger.

 

Toyota is pretty much best in the world in engine quality, I mean, they can last forever. But they suck in pretty much everything else (design, safety, engine choices...).

 

the new ones yes, but the old ones were pretty damn tough in stock form, granted the older 20r and 22r need a bit more grunt but all in all they're pretty good.

 

Just like the ford exploder sport-trac's?

 

The majority of the vechiles that i know that have atleast over 300,000 on original engine and trany worked hard everyday for decades are not toys but old ford and chevy trucks,vans,or suv either they have a old 300i or a old 302 or 350 , diesels what have u. Have 340,000 on are 87 econoline work van, friends dad has over 560,000 on his old f-350 diesel ,old k5 with over 300,000 with a 350, 84 f-250 super duty with 302 with over 500,000, I can go on. I also know ppl with over 400,000 on there old vics 302s or 4.6. Now dont get me wrong there is alot of toys with alot of miles but id yet to see as many compared with the amount of american vechiles cars or trucks that I know exspecially with work miles.

 

Im a member of a sport trac forum with over 10,000 members, and no one has even cracked their bed yet, and thats with 5 year old vehicles. How olds the new tacos? looks like toyota needs to do a little more reseach before they just throw their crap out there.

 

Exactly, Toyota and nissan really have no truck experience they just in the last 5 yrs came out with a true full size truck before all they made were small trucks so how they get off to act like there the best is beyond me especially toyota u see the comercial of how they build there trucks for load after load yr after yr yeah thats y there beds are cracking and everything in between. You want a long lasting truck for load after load yr after yr go out and by a real truck a american truck from companies thats been making full size trucks for well over 50 yrs not little over 5.