Harbor Freight Utility Trailer!!!
Save thousands!
Seriously. Put the $$ saved into a Roth IRA.
Save thousands!
Seriously. Put the $$ saved into a Roth IRA.
Ford trucks vs Toyota trucks
- Thread starter zerosoma
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Y_K
Originally Posted By: bepperb
I don't understand what a 3.0l v6 ranger can tow that you can't with your current cars. IMO buy a utility trailer and that will do everything the ranger could for 10% the price. If you really need to tow things this should be a Tundra vs F150 debate.
Agree. If you really need to tow you need a diesel. Also, Tundra had a streak of quick rust problems with damaged frames - check those years out.
Good luck!
Well, ill have to disagree with you there.. A diesel is not required for towing, Yes if your pulling a big fifth wheel but not for a utility trailer or ever a 16 foot car hauler.
1500 pickups handle this duty just fine with sparkplugs.
And for that matter a 1500 T.W.D. pickup can be bought for little more than a ford ranger..
Ford Ranger and most small pickups serve the purpose of small items that need hauled, stoves, fridges, couple of motorcycles.. fairly light load's and unloaded can manage just slightly better MPG than most full size trucks.
O.P. for a spare auto that you want just for towing hauling i would bypass the small trucks and stick to full size, then look at what options you NEED v.s. Want.. go from there, Just be honst with yourself about this trucks intended purpose.
Originally Posted By: bepperb
I don't understand what a 3.0l v6 ranger can tow that you can't with your current cars. IMO buy a utility trailer and that will do everything the ranger could for 10% the price. If you really need to tow things this should be a Tundra vs F150 debate.
Agree. If you really need to tow you need a diesel. Also, Tundra had a streak of quick rust problems with damaged frames - check those years out.
Good luck!
Well, ill have to disagree with you there.. A diesel is not required for towing, Yes if your pulling a big fifth wheel but not for a utility trailer or ever a 16 foot car hauler.
1500 pickups handle this duty just fine with sparkplugs.
And for that matter a 1500 T.W.D. pickup can be bought for little more than a ford ranger..
Ford Ranger and most small pickups serve the purpose of small items that need hauled, stoves, fridges, couple of motorcycles.. fairly light load's and unloaded can manage just slightly better MPG than most full size trucks.
O.P. for a spare auto that you want just for towing hauling i would bypass the small trucks and stick to full size, then look at what options you NEED v.s. Want.. go from there, Just be honst with yourself about this trucks intended purpose.
The Tundra is a whole lot bigger.
I had a 97 Ranger with that engine and it did well, sold it with 350,000 km on it and no problems or oil consumption.
I also have a 2002 Toyota HiLux pickup with 360,000 km right now that is excellent, plus a 98 T100 with 280,000 miles without anything other than preventive maintenance.
So both make some good stuff. Depends on the load you need, size you want (the T100 hauls more than a Tundra and is smaller). Do the prescribed maintenance and either will be good.
I had a 97 Ranger with that engine and it did well, sold it with 350,000 km on it and no problems or oil consumption.
I also have a 2002 Toyota HiLux pickup with 360,000 km right now that is excellent, plus a 98 T100 with 280,000 miles without anything other than preventive maintenance.
So both make some good stuff. Depends on the load you need, size you want (the T100 hauls more than a Tundra and is smaller). Do the prescribed maintenance and either will be good.
Originally Posted By: rjundi
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Toyota trucks rot out and they are overpriced on the used market.
Buy a Ford, Chevy, or Dodge.
What are you trying to use the truck for? A Ranger isn't going to tow much more than a Rav4.
Toyota (Tundra) fixed the rust issue by replacing the frame. The body is no worst or better than Big 3 of similiar age.
Cool now they just have to stop putting drum brakes on them.
They are still to expensive for what you get. Only a handful of contractors run them, very rare.
Toyota only represents a very small percentage of the pickup market in the US. American car companies don't do a lot of things right, but one thing they do very well is build light duty trucks.
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Toyota trucks rot out and they are overpriced on the used market.
Buy a Ford, Chevy, or Dodge.
What are you trying to use the truck for? A Ranger isn't going to tow much more than a Rav4.
Toyota (Tundra) fixed the rust issue by replacing the frame. The body is no worst or better than Big 3 of similiar age.
Cool now they just have to stop putting drum brakes on them.
They are still to expensive for what you get. Only a handful of contractors run them, very rare.
Toyota only represents a very small percentage of the pickup market in the US. American car companies don't do a lot of things right, but one thing they do very well is build light duty trucks.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Op.
I will add that a ranger is barely a truck,so keep that in mind when choosing. It's not going to tow or haul much,nor will it get your neighbours out of the ditch,so if all you need is a small utility vehicle I suggest a trailer and pull it with a vehicle you already have,because a rangers bed size and payload is comparable to a medium sized utility trailer which will cost under 1000 new.
Now if you are going to be really pulling and hauling things and actually using the abilities of a truck then buy a real truck.
And the award for most ignorant comment in the thread goes to......this guy ^^. My Ranger can and has hauled over 1300 lbs in the bed on more than one occasion. It also has a tow rating of 5000 lbs. Yep, no real practical use at all...
I also would not hesitate to use it to pull someone out of a ditch. It is every bit a "real truck" as a full size and can do about 85% of what any half ton can do. I have no use for the extra bulk and fuel penalty of a full size, and I will continue to use my "fake truck" for real truck tasks.
You obviously have no personal experience with Rangers.
Op.
I will add that a ranger is barely a truck,so keep that in mind when choosing. It's not going to tow or haul much,nor will it get your neighbours out of the ditch,so if all you need is a small utility vehicle I suggest a trailer and pull it with a vehicle you already have,because a rangers bed size and payload is comparable to a medium sized utility trailer which will cost under 1000 new.
Now if you are going to be really pulling and hauling things and actually using the abilities of a truck then buy a real truck.
And the award for most ignorant comment in the thread goes to......this guy ^^. My Ranger can and has hauled over 1300 lbs in the bed on more than one occasion. It also has a tow rating of 5000 lbs. Yep, no real practical use at all...
You obviously have no personal experience with Rangers.
Originally Posted By: supton
You have to define how much is being towed. 3,000lb, across town? Almost anything will do. 3,000lb, on a regular basis? Go full sized gas. 5,000lb, across town? Go gas full sized. 5,000lb, on a regular basis? Probably want to go diesel. 10k on a regular basis...
5,000 on any gas fullsize is well within reason and no need for Diesel. I tow a small horse trailer (2 horse model) frequently and an 8,500lb RV a few times a year with my 6.0L Sierra Denali and hardly notice the load back there but do realize a Diesel would be better all around at the RV load. I think at the 8-10k lbs range a Diesel is probably warranted but not completely necessary unless a lot of towing is involved.
You have to define how much is being towed. 3,000lb, across town? Almost anything will do. 3,000lb, on a regular basis? Go full sized gas. 5,000lb, across town? Go gas full sized. 5,000lb, on a regular basis? Probably want to go diesel. 10k on a regular basis...
5,000 on any gas fullsize is well within reason and no need for Diesel. I tow a small horse trailer (2 horse model) frequently and an 8,500lb RV a few times a year with my 6.0L Sierra Denali and hardly notice the load back there but do realize a Diesel would be better all around at the RV load. I think at the 8-10k lbs range a Diesel is probably warranted but not completely necessary unless a lot of towing is involved.
Originally Posted By: exranger06
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Op.
I will add that a ranger is barely a truck,so keep that in mind when choosing. It's not going to tow or haul much,nor will it get your neighbours out of the ditch,so if all you need is a small utility vehicle I suggest a trailer and pull it with a vehicle you already have,because a rangers bed size and payload is comparable to a medium sized utility trailer which will cost under 1000 new.
Now if you are going to be really pulling and hauling things and actually using the abilities of a truck then buy a real truck.
And the award for most ignorant comment in the thread goes to......this guy ^^. My Ranger can and has hauled over 1300 lbs in the bed on more than one occasion. It also has a tow rating of 5000 lbs. Yep, no real practical use at all...
I also would not hesitate to use it to pull someone out of a ditch. It is every bit a "real truck" as a full size and can do about 85% of what any half ton can do. I have no use for the extra bulk and fuel penalty of a full size, and I will continue to use my "fake truck" for real truck tasks.
You obviously have no personal experience with Rangers.
Fuel penalty? Really dude? Those little trucks get just as bad mpg's as a full size 1/2 ton, ok they might do better by like .5/1 gallon but it really isn't that noticeable, been there done that….
Compact trucks like the ranger are for groceries, odd jobs ( that involve no more than carrying two buckets of paint), groceries, a lawn mower, and what not. Every time I see a compact truck, or even a car for that matter, towing anything it just looks unsafe.
Despite all that I would get the ford, I'm biased, I like ford, besides for those model years of the tundra, it really wasn't that much more truck, at least not compared to the later model tundras.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Op.
I will add that a ranger is barely a truck,so keep that in mind when choosing. It's not going to tow or haul much,nor will it get your neighbours out of the ditch,so if all you need is a small utility vehicle I suggest a trailer and pull it with a vehicle you already have,because a rangers bed size and payload is comparable to a medium sized utility trailer which will cost under 1000 new.
Now if you are going to be really pulling and hauling things and actually using the abilities of a truck then buy a real truck.
And the award for most ignorant comment in the thread goes to......this guy ^^. My Ranger can and has hauled over 1300 lbs in the bed on more than one occasion. It also has a tow rating of 5000 lbs. Yep, no real practical use at all...
You obviously have no personal experience with Rangers.
Fuel penalty? Really dude? Those little trucks get just as bad mpg's as a full size 1/2 ton, ok they might do better by like .5/1 gallon but it really isn't that noticeable, been there done that….
Compact trucks like the ranger are for groceries, odd jobs ( that involve no more than carrying two buckets of paint), groceries, a lawn mower, and what not. Every time I see a compact truck, or even a car for that matter, towing anything it just looks unsafe.
Despite all that I would get the ford, I'm biased, I like ford, besides for those model years of the tundra, it really wasn't that much more truck, at least not compared to the later model tundras.
Originally Posted By: bepperb
I don't understand what a 3.0l v6 ranger can tow that you can't with your current cars. IMO buy a utility trailer and that will do everything the ranger could for 10% the price. If you really need to tow things this should be a Tundra vs F150 debate.
It's not just about towing, it's about hauling. Furniture, tall items, etc.
i.e. bed of a truck.
I don't understand what a 3.0l v6 ranger can tow that you can't with your current cars. IMO buy a utility trailer and that will do everything the ranger could for 10% the price. If you really need to tow things this should be a Tundra vs F150 debate.
It's not just about towing, it's about hauling. Furniture, tall items, etc.
i.e. bed of a truck.
Originally Posted By: zerosoma
Originally Posted By: bepperb
I don't understand what a 3.0l v6 ranger can tow that you can't with your current cars. IMO buy a utility trailer and that will do everything the ranger could for 10% the price. If you really need to tow things this should be a Tundra vs F150 debate.
It's not just about towing, it's about hauling. Furniture, tall items, etc.
i.e. bed of a truck.
Utility trailer. Lower to ground = easier to load. No extra insurance or maintenance.
How often will you actually need a truck vs your Rav4 + a trailer? Simple. Cheap. (assuming the Rav mentioned is still in your stable)
Originally Posted By: bepperb
I don't understand what a 3.0l v6 ranger can tow that you can't with your current cars. IMO buy a utility trailer and that will do everything the ranger could for 10% the price. If you really need to tow things this should be a Tundra vs F150 debate.
It's not just about towing, it's about hauling. Furniture, tall items, etc.
i.e. bed of a truck.
Utility trailer. Lower to ground = easier to load. No extra insurance or maintenance.
How often will you actually need a truck vs your Rav4 + a trailer? Simple. Cheap. (assuming the Rav mentioned is still in your stable)
Last edited:
Funny when people who probably have Bedrugs knock small trucks for not "bein' REAL trucks." Please...my Ranger towed a trailer almost every single day last summer. Sometimes as much as 1000 lbs. in the bed and another 4000 being towed. Do that with a FWD and report back on how well it goes. My Ranger has also had coolant splashed all over the windshield from a '98 Ram 5.9L that had a catastrophic head gasket and radiator failure while towing a trailer that was roughly the same size and weight as the one I was towing at the same time.
That said, depending on how much and how often you plan to tow, sometimes a larger truck does make it easier. They are less susceptible to whatever movements the trailer makes. I'd also rather tow with a 4.0L Ranger than a 3.0L. The 3.0L can do it, but will be working hard and drinking gas. It will offer no fuel economy gains, it just has to work harder. They are very reliable though.
My 2002 3.0 Ranger has gone 140K miles with no major repairs, and has easily hauled and towed more than 90% of the 1/2 ton grocery getters out there. If I went to a Line-X dealer to take advantage of my lifetime warranty, they would freak. You don't trash a Line-X in a Ranger by carrying groceries.
That said, if towing over 4-5K lbs. regularly, get the Tundra and budget for things like the timing belt. Tundras are good trucks, but aren't as cheap and easy to keep going as a Ranger. If I had a Tundra, I would have already needed to do a t-belt at about $1K. I've never needed to put anywhere near $1K in the Ranger at any one time. My biggest expense aside from fuel has definitely been tires.
That said, depending on how much and how often you plan to tow, sometimes a larger truck does make it easier. They are less susceptible to whatever movements the trailer makes. I'd also rather tow with a 4.0L Ranger than a 3.0L. The 3.0L can do it, but will be working hard and drinking gas. It will offer no fuel economy gains, it just has to work harder. They are very reliable though.
My 2002 3.0 Ranger has gone 140K miles with no major repairs, and has easily hauled and towed more than 90% of the 1/2 ton grocery getters out there. If I went to a Line-X dealer to take advantage of my lifetime warranty, they would freak. You don't trash a Line-X in a Ranger by carrying groceries.
That said, if towing over 4-5K lbs. regularly, get the Tundra and budget for things like the timing belt. Tundras are good trucks, but aren't as cheap and easy to keep going as a Ranger. If I had a Tundra, I would have already needed to do a t-belt at about $1K. I've never needed to put anywhere near $1K in the Ranger at any one time. My biggest expense aside from fuel has definitely been tires.
They over-engineer pick-up trucks overseas. I'd gladly own a diesel powered Ford Ranger if they offered it in the U.S., like the one in the following video, but if given the choice I'd choose a diesel Hilux over any current pick-up, domestic or import, offered in the U.S.
Don't try this with any pick-up designed for the American market.
Don't try this with any pick-up designed for the American market.
Originally Posted By: jimmy87
Originally Posted By: exranger06
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Op.
I will add that a ranger is barely a truck,so keep that in mind when choosing. It's not going to tow or haul much,nor will it get your neighbours out of the ditch,so if all you need is a small utility vehicle I suggest a trailer and pull it with a vehicle you already have,because a rangers bed size and payload is comparable to a medium sized utility trailer which will cost under 1000 new.
Now if you are going to be really pulling and hauling things and actually using the abilities of a truck then buy a real truck.
And the award for most ignorant comment in the thread goes to......this guy ^^. My Ranger can and has hauled over 1300 lbs in the bed on more than one occasion. It also has a tow rating of 5000 lbs. Yep, no real practical use at all...
I also would not hesitate to use it to pull someone out of a ditch. It is every bit a "real truck" as a full size and can do about 85% of what any half ton can do. I have no use for the extra bulk and fuel penalty of a full size, and I will continue to use my "fake truck" for real truck tasks.
You obviously have no personal experience with Rangers.
Fuel penalty? Really dude? Those little trucks get just as bad mpg's as a full size 1/2 ton, ok they might do better by like .5/1 gallon but it really isn't that noticeable, been there done that….
Compact trucks like the ranger are for groceries, odd jobs ( that involve no more than carrying two buckets of paint), groceries, a lawn mower, and what not. Every time I see a compact truck, or even a car for that matter, towing anything it just looks unsafe.
Despite all that I would get the ford, I'm biased, I like ford, besides for those model years of the tundra, it really wasn't that much more truck, at least not compared to the later model tundras.
A 4 cylinder Ranger gets about 28 mpg highway. Let's see a full size come anywhere close to that mileage. You won't get the full 5000 lb towing capacity that the V6 has, but you can still haul over 1000 lbs in the bed. Carrying no more than two buckets of paint? Did you miss the part of me carrying over 1300 lbs of top soil several times? The truck didn't even notice it was back there. Seems all these guys bad mouthing small trucks are just assuming they aren't capable of much and have NO personal experience with them, and are SEVERELY understanding their capabilities.
Originally Posted By: exranger06
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Op.
I will add that a ranger is barely a truck,so keep that in mind when choosing. It's not going to tow or haul much,nor will it get your neighbours out of the ditch,so if all you need is a small utility vehicle I suggest a trailer and pull it with a vehicle you already have,because a rangers bed size and payload is comparable to a medium sized utility trailer which will cost under 1000 new.
Now if you are going to be really pulling and hauling things and actually using the abilities of a truck then buy a real truck.
And the award for most ignorant comment in the thread goes to......this guy ^^. My Ranger can and has hauled over 1300 lbs in the bed on more than one occasion. It also has a tow rating of 5000 lbs. Yep, no real practical use at all...
You obviously have no personal experience with Rangers.
Fuel penalty? Really dude? Those little trucks get just as bad mpg's as a full size 1/2 ton, ok they might do better by like .5/1 gallon but it really isn't that noticeable, been there done that….
Compact trucks like the ranger are for groceries, odd jobs ( that involve no more than carrying two buckets of paint), groceries, a lawn mower, and what not. Every time I see a compact truck, or even a car for that matter, towing anything it just looks unsafe.
Despite all that I would get the ford, I'm biased, I like ford, besides for those model years of the tundra, it really wasn't that much more truck, at least not compared to the later model tundras.
A 4 cylinder Ranger gets about 28 mpg highway. Let's see a full size come anywhere close to that mileage. You won't get the full 5000 lb towing capacity that the V6 has, but you can still haul over 1000 lbs in the bed. Carrying no more than two buckets of paint? Did you miss the part of me carrying over 1300 lbs of top soil several times? The truck didn't even notice it was back there. Seems all these guys bad mouthing small trucks are just assuming they aren't capable of much and have NO personal experience with them, and are SEVERELY understanding their capabilities.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: exranger06
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Op.
I will add that a ranger is barely a truck,so keep that in mind when choosing. It's not going to tow or haul much,nor will it get your neighbours out of the ditch,so if all you need is a small utility vehicle I suggest a trailer and pull it with a vehicle you already have,because a rangers bed size and payload is comparable to a medium sized utility trailer which will cost under 1000 new.
Now if you are going to be really pulling and hauling things and actually using the abilities of a truck then buy a real truck.
And the award for most ignorant comment in the thread goes to......this guy ^^. My Ranger can and has hauled over 1300 lbs in the bed on more than one occasion. It also has a tow rating of 5000 lbs. Yep, no real practical use at all...
I also would not hesitate to use it to pull someone out of a ditch. It is every bit a "real truck" as a full size and can do about 85% of what any half ton can do. I have no use for the extra bulk and fuel penalty of a full size, and I will continue to use my "fake truck" for real truck tasks.
You obviously have no personal experience with Rangers.
Gotta agree with you here on the capabilities of the Ranger. I had a 1997 Explorer with the 4.0L (wish I had opted for the 5.0L, but that's another discussion) and I towed a number of 21-22' boats, one of them a water-logged 1947 Chris-Craft sedan with it and had no issues. It was a very capable platform (Ranger/Explorer).
Is the Expedition a better vehicle for towing? Yes. It has bigger brakes, a bigger engine, a more robust transmission, bigger diff's....etc. And of course a higher towing capacity (around 8,000lbs). But for many of the things I've towed in the last four years, an Explorer would have done the job just fine.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Op.
I will add that a ranger is barely a truck,so keep that in mind when choosing. It's not going to tow or haul much,nor will it get your neighbours out of the ditch,so if all you need is a small utility vehicle I suggest a trailer and pull it with a vehicle you already have,because a rangers bed size and payload is comparable to a medium sized utility trailer which will cost under 1000 new.
Now if you are going to be really pulling and hauling things and actually using the abilities of a truck then buy a real truck.
And the award for most ignorant comment in the thread goes to......this guy ^^. My Ranger can and has hauled over 1300 lbs in the bed on more than one occasion. It also has a tow rating of 5000 lbs. Yep, no real practical use at all...
You obviously have no personal experience with Rangers.
Gotta agree with you here on the capabilities of the Ranger. I had a 1997 Explorer with the 4.0L (wish I had opted for the 5.0L, but that's another discussion) and I towed a number of 21-22' boats, one of them a water-logged 1947 Chris-Craft sedan with it and had no issues. It was a very capable platform (Ranger/Explorer).
Is the Expedition a better vehicle for towing? Yes. It has bigger brakes, a bigger engine, a more robust transmission, bigger diff's....etc. And of course a higher towing capacity (around 8,000lbs). But for many of the things I've towed in the last four years, an Explorer would have done the job just fine.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: GenSan
They over-engineer pick-up trucks overseas. I'd gladly own a diesel powered Ford Ranger if they offered it in the U.S., like the one in the following video, but if given the choice I'd choose a diesel Hilux over any current pick-up, domestic or import, offered in the U.S.
Don't try this with any pick-up designed for the American market.
Oh noes! People have tried it!!!
The last one.... I've done the same thing in my Expedition!!! Sweet Jesus, if only I had known that I had an inferior American vehicle and that I needed a Hilux!!!!
They over-engineer pick-up trucks overseas. I'd gladly own a diesel powered Ford Ranger if they offered it in the U.S., like the one in the following video, but if given the choice I'd choose a diesel Hilux over any current pick-up, domestic or import, offered in the U.S.
Don't try this with any pick-up designed for the American market.
Oh noes! People have tried it!!!
The last one.... I've done the same thing in my Expedition!!! Sweet Jesus, if only I had known that I had an inferior American vehicle and that I needed a Hilux!!!!
i own an older ranger, rear wheel drive 4cylinder with well over 200k miles. this is my 3nd one evr owned, 1st one went just over 350k with original motor and transmission before retiring. mileage on these things is great, as for towing, i never pulled anything bigger than the bed would hold, but never been nice too either as too concerns of weight hauling wood, furniture, etc. if towing something like a camper, follow limits in the handbook and you should be fine.
i have alot of people who swear be the toyotas as well, never personally owned one. any vehicle, imo, if properly maintained and treated well can survive the long haul.
check out the toyota and ford ranger forums, theres alot of good/bad/indifferent knowledge there that may help.
i have alot of people who swear be the toyotas as well, never personally owned one. any vehicle, imo, if properly maintained and treated well can survive the long haul.
check out the toyota and ford ranger forums, theres alot of good/bad/indifferent knowledge there that may help.
Watch out for rust on the Ranger. Broken frames on trucks used in the salt belt are very common on the 99.
Spring perches rot right off and usually the bumper mounts also, if you have bad luck the the frame breaks behind the cab.
Go for the Tundra with the least amount of rot, check the frame front to back, there is no such thing as a little rust on these vehicles. Once it starts the thing is toast.
Unfortunately both these makes are known to have some real rust buckets.
Spring perches rot right off and usually the bumper mounts also, if you have bad luck the the frame breaks behind the cab.
Go for the Tundra with the least amount of rot, check the frame front to back, there is no such thing as a little rust on these vehicles. Once it starts the thing is toast.
Unfortunately both these makes are known to have some real rust buckets.
i own an older ranger, rear wheel drive 4cylinder with well over 200k miles. this is my 3nd.... supposed too be 2nd, sorry.
and previous posters have it, look for rust on any of them, its a huge issue where i live, state tosses salt on road during rain around here and its worse if its a chance of snow.
if it were me, depending on use, i would go with lowest odometer reading, best condition, and the one with the most record of upkeep. either of them could be money pits if they were neglected severely.
and previous posters have it, look for rust on any of them, its a huge issue where i live, state tosses salt on road during rain around here and its worse if its a chance of snow.
if it were me, depending on use, i would go with lowest odometer reading, best condition, and the one with the most record of upkeep. either of them could be money pits if they were neglected severely.
Originally Posted By: exranger06
Originally Posted By: jimmy87
Originally Posted By: exranger06
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Op.
I will add that a ranger is barely a truck,so keep that in mind when choosing. It's not going to tow or haul much,nor will it get your neighbours out of the ditch,so if all you need is a small utility vehicle I suggest a trailer and pull it with a vehicle you already have,because a rangers bed size and payload is comparable to a medium sized utility trailer which will cost under 1000 new.
Now if you are going to be really pulling and hauling things and actually using the abilities of a truck then buy a real truck.
And the award for most ignorant comment in the thread goes to......this guy ^^. My Ranger can and has hauled over 1300 lbs in the bed on more than one occasion. It also has a tow rating of 5000 lbs. Yep, no real practical use at all...
I also would not hesitate to use it to pull someone out of a ditch. It is every bit a "real truck" as a full size and can do about 85% of what any half ton can do. I have no use for the extra bulk and fuel penalty of a full size, and I will continue to use my "fake truck" for real truck tasks.
You obviously have no personal experience with Rangers.
Fuel penalty? Really dude? Those little trucks get just as bad mpg's as a full size 1/2 ton, ok they might do better by like .5/1 gallon but it really isn't that noticeable, been there done that….
Compact trucks like the ranger are for groceries, odd jobs ( that involve no more than carrying two buckets of paint), groceries, a lawn mower, and what not. Every time I see a compact truck, or even a car for that matter, towing anything it just looks unsafe.
Despite all that I would get the ford, I'm biased, I like ford, besides for those model years of the tundra, it really wasn't that much more truck, at least not compared to the later model tundras.
A 4 cylinder Ranger gets about 28 mpg highway. Let's see a full size come anywhere close to that mileage. You won't get the full 5000 lb towing capacity that the V6 has, but you can still haul over 1000 lbs in the bed. Carrying no more than two buckets of paint? Did you miss the part of me carrying over 1300 lbs of top soil several times? The truck didn't even notice it was back there. Seems all these guys bad mouthing small trucks are just assuming they aren't capable of much and have NO personal experience with them, and are SEVERELY understanding their capabilities.
4 cylinder? Really? Who wants that? Might as well get a Camry, the 6 cylinder is a gas guzzler and you know it, that's why you brought up the 4 cylinder, 1300 pounds of top soil, like I said before your endangering the good people on the road, a properly equipped ranger (2011 model) has a max payload of around 1500 pounds, your not going to tell me that your older one or a 4 cylinder is even close to being rated to safely move 1300 pounds in the back of the bed, are you? Im sure the ranger is a reliable solid truck, not sure what the op wants to do with it as far as work goes, but despite me "bad mouthing" the ranger I would still recommend it over the tundra, but if it where me i would rather have a v6/v8 f150 for work.
Originally Posted By: jimmy87
Originally Posted By: exranger06
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Op.
I will add that a ranger is barely a truck,so keep that in mind when choosing. It's not going to tow or haul much,nor will it get your neighbours out of the ditch,so if all you need is a small utility vehicle I suggest a trailer and pull it with a vehicle you already have,because a rangers bed size and payload is comparable to a medium sized utility trailer which will cost under 1000 new.
Now if you are going to be really pulling and hauling things and actually using the abilities of a truck then buy a real truck.
And the award for most ignorant comment in the thread goes to......this guy ^^. My Ranger can and has hauled over 1300 lbs in the bed on more than one occasion. It also has a tow rating of 5000 lbs. Yep, no real practical use at all...
You obviously have no personal experience with Rangers.
Fuel penalty? Really dude? Those little trucks get just as bad mpg's as a full size 1/2 ton, ok they might do better by like .5/1 gallon but it really isn't that noticeable, been there done that….
Compact trucks like the ranger are for groceries, odd jobs ( that involve no more than carrying two buckets of paint), groceries, a lawn mower, and what not. Every time I see a compact truck, or even a car for that matter, towing anything it just looks unsafe.
Despite all that I would get the ford, I'm biased, I like ford, besides for those model years of the tundra, it really wasn't that much more truck, at least not compared to the later model tundras.
A 4 cylinder Ranger gets about 28 mpg highway. Let's see a full size come anywhere close to that mileage. You won't get the full 5000 lb towing capacity that the V6 has, but you can still haul over 1000 lbs in the bed. Carrying no more than two buckets of paint? Did you miss the part of me carrying over 1300 lbs of top soil several times? The truck didn't even notice it was back there. Seems all these guys bad mouthing small trucks are just assuming they aren't capable of much and have NO personal experience with them, and are SEVERELY understanding their capabilities.
4 cylinder? Really? Who wants that? Might as well get a Camry, the 6 cylinder is a gas guzzler and you know it, that's why you brought up the 4 cylinder, 1300 pounds of top soil, like I said before your endangering the good people on the road, a properly equipped ranger (2011 model) has a max payload of around 1500 pounds, your not going to tell me that your older one or a 4 cylinder is even close to being rated to safely move 1300 pounds in the back of the bed, are you? Im sure the ranger is a reliable solid truck, not sure what the op wants to do with it as far as work goes, but despite me "bad mouthing" the ranger I would still recommend it over the tundra, but if it where me i would rather have a v6/v8 f150 for work.
Originally Posted By: jimmy87
4 cylinder? Really? Who wants that? Might as well get a Camry, the 6 cylinder is a gas guzzler and you know it, that's why you brought up the 4 cylinder, 1300 pounds of top soil, like I said before your endangering the good people on the road, a properly equipped ranger (2011 model) has a max payload of around 1500 pounds, your not going to tell me that your older one or a 4 cylinder is even close to being rated to safely move 1300 pounds in the back of the bed, are you? Im sure the ranger is a reliable solid truck, not sure what the op wants to do with it as far as work goes, but despite me "bad mouthing" the ranger I would still recommend it over the tundra, but if it where me i would rather have a v6/v8 f150 for work.
I owned a 2001 2.5L Ranger...payload capacity was 1200 lbs. Actually, I don't know of any configuration of Ranger made since 1998 that's below 1000 lbs. for payload. It's not that hard to move half a ton. I've done it often enough to know that.
I didn't know the Camry offered high 20s MPG with 1000+ lbs. payload capacity and the room of an open bed.
Just because a lot of people feel they need the largest V8 they can get in a crew cab full size so they can get their power chair down to the Golden Corral does not mean a smaller truck can't do anything. I made a living with my small truck last summer. It paid the bills towing trailers day in and day out and has more battle scars than 10 Golden Corral cruisers.
4 cylinder? Really? Who wants that? Might as well get a Camry, the 6 cylinder is a gas guzzler and you know it, that's why you brought up the 4 cylinder, 1300 pounds of top soil, like I said before your endangering the good people on the road, a properly equipped ranger (2011 model) has a max payload of around 1500 pounds, your not going to tell me that your older one or a 4 cylinder is even close to being rated to safely move 1300 pounds in the back of the bed, are you? Im sure the ranger is a reliable solid truck, not sure what the op wants to do with it as far as work goes, but despite me "bad mouthing" the ranger I would still recommend it over the tundra, but if it where me i would rather have a v6/v8 f150 for work.
I owned a 2001 2.5L Ranger...payload capacity was 1200 lbs. Actually, I don't know of any configuration of Ranger made since 1998 that's below 1000 lbs. for payload. It's not that hard to move half a ton. I've done it often enough to know that.
I didn't know the Camry offered high 20s MPG with 1000+ lbs. payload capacity and the room of an open bed.
Just because a lot of people feel they need the largest V8 they can get in a crew cab full size so they can get their power chair down to the Golden Corral does not mean a smaller truck can't do anything. I made a living with my small truck last summer. It paid the bills towing trailers day in and day out and has more battle scars than 10 Golden Corral cruisers.
That's great overkill, but like I pointed and the Ford engineers had pointed out in the video, some vehicles were just designed with water crossings in mind from their inception. None of those Ford pick-ups you pointed out in your videos were engineered for a typical river crossing one might encounter overseas. Another reason why many diesel pick-up trucks/SUVs' overseas have high mounted snorkels on them. I've never seen a snorkel on a domestic pick-up or SUV unless it was a military Humvee.
I never made this into a Ranger(Toyota) or Hilux(Ford) argument, look in the mirror; you did.
I stand by my original statement that pick-up trucks overseas are built to a different standard and that I prefer a diesel Hilux over any current model domestic/import pick-up available in our LOVELY U.S.of A. Frankly I could care less what you think so have a wonderful day
I never made this into a Ranger(Toyota) or Hilux(Ford) argument, look in the mirror; you did.
I stand by my original statement that pick-up trucks overseas are built to a different standard and that I prefer a diesel Hilux over any current model domestic/import pick-up available in our LOVELY U.S.of A. Frankly I could care less what you think so have a wonderful day
- Status
