14th Dec 2004, 10:47

Finally, Toyota got their act together and increased the horsepower for the 05 Tacoma. The re-sale of the Toyota products is very impressive as well. The weak motor however is why I passed over a used Tacoma Quad Cab and instead bought the Dodge Dakota Quad with the 4.7 liter V-8. My Dakota with the V-8 will get 17 to 18mpg highway and leave an older, V-6 equiped Toyota in the dust.

12th Apr 2005, 17:54

I bought a Tacoma 2004 last year. It has 2 wheel drive and the small engine. It's a 5 speed manual. In the summer I get 32 MPG, and in the winter I get 28 MPG. Had a squeaky clutch pedal assembly. Service fixed it, now it's quiet. I've got 10k miles on it, and it runs great. Happy to be a Tacoma owner.

28th Jul 2006, 13:48

I am/was the proud owner of 04 4WD TRD V6 Tacoma with 51000 miles, until I started checking the MPG (averaging on the highway 16.1 to 16.8). Pretty sad considering I purchased it new for its posted highway estimated mileage of 26MPG.

Anyway resale is good, so time to start looking for a V8 Tundra. Hope it's as reliable/durable as the smaller toy. Still a dedicated Toyota owner.

17th Sep 2006, 15:15

Before buying a new truck I test drove the Tacoma (as well as several others) and was not impressed by anything about it. It was slow, rough-riding, had a very cheaply made interior (the worst of any I looked at) and the styling was pretty bizarre (though not as bad as the Colorado and Canyon). Since many of my friends own Rangers and not ONE of them has ever had a problem with one, I opted for a loaded V-6 Sport. I got it for 6 grand less than a Tacoma. As for reliability, two of my friends own Tacomas and both have had some pretty major problems. I don't know where people get the idea that they are somehow better. The facts seem to indicate otherwise. If folks want to pay 6 grand more for a myth, I guess that's their business, but I have better things to do with my money.

19th Sep 2006, 15:37

I think it's interesting that people criticize comments that give facts and data, but they never back up their claims with any. Do YOU know anyone who ever had trouble with a Ranger? I don't. They haven't been the world's best selling truck for 22 years for no reason. Have you looked at frequency of repair records? Ford has the best in the automotive industry in trucks.

21st Sep 2006, 13:20

I get really tired of all the misinformation that I see regarding Japanese and American vehicles.

First of all, Toyota and Ford BOTH build fairly good vehicles. There is no question that Ford is the better VALUE. In our large city there are hundreds of companies that use small trucks. 99% use the Ranger, the other 1% use the Dodge Dakota. NO ONE uses Toyota, not because it isn't a good truck, but because it costs 5 to 7 grand more than a comparable Ranger or Dakota.

As for reliability, the Ranger is as good (probably better) than any truck made. Some of the companies here (including two that are owned by members of my family) have 10 year old (or older) Rangers with several hundred thousand miles on them. If a company has a mechanical problem with a truck, they are NOT going to keep buying them year after year at ANY price. The Ranger is a rugged, incredibly reliable truck that stands up to abuse very well.

For 6 or 7 grand less, I'll buy a Ranger over a Tacoma ANY DAY. We've owned 5 in our family (as personal vehicles) since 1986 and not one has ever had ANY problems, so I really don't know how you can get any better quality than that.

22nd Sep 2006, 16:23

Wrong again. The Ranger has never been as reliable as ANY Toyota truck ever built. Companies that use small trucks know that their employees are going to beat the hell out them most likely, and they probably won't get the maintenance they deserve, so why buy a high quality Toyota for someone to beat up when you can buy a disposable Ford truck for cheaper? However, if you are going to buy a truck for YOURSELF, that you will maintain and take care of, the Toyota will far outlast a Ranger 99% of the time. Sure, I've seen a few Rangers get 2-300,000 miles, but I've also seen a LOT of them that were headaches all the time. However, almost EVERY Toyota I have ever encountered has been flawless. In fact, I have never spoken with anyone that had a bad one. I'm sure there might a few, but for every bad Toyota truck, there are 50 junk Rangers. There simply is no comparison in the build quality and workmanship. The Toyota is a much, much better truck.

23rd Sep 2006, 20:23

I have had an opportunity to drive many of the late model fleet trucks at my company making parts deliveries. The trucks are well maintained being mostly new they all seem fine at first. The Rangers and the bigger Fords have been the most reliable, but are the least comfortable. Dodges are comfortable with nice interiors, but more maintenance especially the Ram. The Ram has plenty of power though. The Chev. S-10 handles more carlike than the Ranger. I personally own a new full size/Silverado just with the V6 and it is comfortable and good on gas. I drive a lot on my personal time and its been trouble free. I have only been a passenger in a couple Toyotas however I cannot justify the extra expense for one. I like the styling, but you can save a lot with a domestic model. When you drive someone elses trucks over a 15 year period the upside is that you can be objective. I personally tend to be cheap as long as it has a V6 automatic and a/c I will drive it till it dies. GM now has an excellent drivetrain warranty as well.

24th Sep 2006, 16:48

GM definitely builds some great trucks. We own two GM vehicles and one Ford now. None of them has ever had any problems. I don't understand how trucks that have ZERO problems can be called "worse" than anything else. How can you have LESS than ZERO problems?? Must be some kind of new math.

25th Sep 2006, 16:27

You haven't had any problems YET. Wait a while and you'll wish you'd bought a decent truck.

25th Sep 2006, 16:49

Duhhh...companies buy "disposable" trucks and drive them 12 years and put several hundred thousand miles on them??? I WANT one of those "disposable" trucks!!!

26th Sep 2006, 06:01

To put several hundred thousand miles on a Ford Ranger, you will need several Ford motors and transmissions and several rental vehicles while it is in the Ford garage.

26th Sep 2006, 20:29

So after all these comments which is the cheapest to run for 100,000 miles? I do not think anyone meaunt 700,000 miles anyway. Another way to view it all is you buy 2 Toyotas or 3 Rangers with the same financial outlay. I have driven Rangers up until 50-60,000 miles in the past until they were traded in. They are basic, but get around fine and were good on gas and insurance. I have driven them all. Its hard to also overlook GMs 100,000 mile drivetrain warranty. I now drive a foreign sedan and a full size GM pickup with extended warranties... If you are keeping a vehicle over 150,000 miles also be prepared to spend money on costly electronics, power options windows etc. That is another reason to consider a basic vehicle such as a Ranger.