17th Oct 2006, 15:11
Not sure about perfect Ford F-150's, but my Hemi Ram has been a dream. Actually, I really am not concerned if it will go 100,000+ miles, because I plan to trade it in well before that time.
17th Oct 2006, 15:12
After reading the comments on this posting I'd take the Ranger hands down over a Tacoma. I don't see any evidence that supports paying more for an equal vehicle.
18th Oct 2006, 09:46
Dodge trucks are not only some of the best trucks built, but their resale value is incredible. My 2001 returned 90% of its purchase price when I sold it (in mint condition with 50,000 miles) in 2006. That's the best return on a vehicle I ever got, and I've owned all kinds over the years. I never drive my vehicles over 100,000 miles, keep them perfectly maintained and have never had a single mechanical problem with any of them. If someone wants to keep a vehicle for 300,000 miles and drive a rusty rattle-trap with faded out paint that's their business. I want mine to look and feel NEW. All American trucks will easily remain like new for 100,000 miles, so that's all I care about.
18th Oct 2006, 14:57
I WILL be driving my Tacoma after every Ford owner here has either traded theirs in by choice, or because of a major breakdown too costly to repair, because this Tacoma is a much more well-engineered vehicle with far better workmanship and build quality than anything Ford has ever produced.
18th Oct 2006, 19:33
I drove imports exclusively 70's through 2000 until I saw the quality control slip. I traded Toyotas just as frequent as domestics and they were not infallible. I would rather drive the latest safest technology available much in the way I want the latest computers, plasma screen tv etc in my home. My rotary dial phone worked too forever, but I now have a cell phone. I totally agree with the Dodge owner. I have since gone with domestics and not looked back. And I have saved money my repair incidents are nil because I keep my vehicles in the garage, very well maintained. I do not want a rusted rattletrap with 300,000 miles anywhere on my property. By the way, manufacturers including Toyota do not want everyone to drive and keep vehicles forever or they would be out of business. I have bought many new cars and trucks more for the latest design, features etc. not because of mechanical failures. I personally feel its more likely that a 300,000 mile vehicle is likely unsafe, unreliable, technically obsolete, and very likely not going to start. When you drop repair $ on top of possessing a rusted up hulk its got to be extremely depressing. I would rather save the $5000 cash up front on a domestic... pay all cash... not have a payment and enjoy! If Toyota reads this adjusts their price points than they may woo me back. Until then there seems to be more domestic owners for this very reason.
18th Oct 2006, 20:52
I imagine Toyota's excellent engineering and infallible build quality is why this morning's paper carried an article about the grossly over-rated and underpowered Highlander SUV being recalled (AGAIN) due to an accelerator that might stick on the floor and "possibly cause an accident" (yeah, I GUESS SO!!) Another example of how Toyota builds such PERFECT vehicles.
20th Oct 2006, 16:04
You might want to unbolt and remove the bed off your truck a combined GM/Toyota venture. If GM ever merges with Toyota it might present an interesting dilemna for you someday. Personally I like GMs new 100,000 mile warranty and the vehicles are less. At least I examine and consider all makes every year and not camp out on the same site in which I already possess the same vehicle. I may buy a Toyota again,2 years later perhaps a Nissan, GMs full size is nice, Dodge Ram just to have something new and different. The warranty is the biggest factor in my buying decision next to cost.
21st Oct 2006, 17:27
For the record, I haven't owned just Toyota's. First car was an '80 Buick Century, great car that really took a beating. Next was a '79 Malibu, which I just sadly let go last year. Had an '87 Ranger, which was the biggest piece of junk ever to roll off of an assembly line anywhere in the universe, should have bought a bicycle instead, would have gotten further. Also had a '95 Dakota which ran up to 115,000 miles until someone totalled it by broadsiding me. That was an awesome truck which I'm sure had at least another 100,000 left it in. The Dodge and the Buick were very good; I think I owned the last model year that Chevy made anything noteworthy, and the Ford was a typical Ford; miserable piece of crap.
The 3 best though were Toyota's. I had a '95 Toyota truck, last year before they became Tacoma's. These trucks (1989 to 1995), are to this day the best trucks ever produced. Can't hurt them with a stick of dynamite. I also had a '93 Toyota Tercel, which was one of, if not THE best car ever made; just as unstoppable as the trucks, got 36-40 miles per gallon, and I'll probably get roasted for this, but was more fun to drive than anything else I've owned. I actually sold this one for the Ranger, which I'm still kicking myself for. I traded in the best for the worst. And now I have the '98 Tacoma, which is as good as the other 2 Toyota's, which is to say that it is perfect; no trouble at all. This is why I am such an avid Toyota driver now, I've owned 3 and could not have been more impressed with any of them. Ran flawlessly, all got good gas mileage, never a squeak or rattle. And if the GM/Toyota nightmare merger ever happens, I will be driving Honda's.
22nd Oct 2006, 08:39
This is a 2004 review... yours is a 1998. I buy every couple years so 2004-present is relevant. As far as Honda I feel they were great through 2000. A reviewer looking at a 2004 would not realistically benefit from someone owning a 98 model. Same with the Ford Ranger... if you had a bad experience with an 80's version what relevance is that with an 07. You need to be on the 1998 Toyota review. Someone could be misled and go out and find your comments missing the mark. I had a new 1977 Toyota Celica GT for example and a great car one of my best ever... however my 1980 was a total lemon. One year even can have a new set of concerns or have the earlier problems corrected.
22nd Oct 2006, 10:54
I find the idea of a GM takeover of Toyota a great idea. Then Toyota (which has the worst customer service of any auto manufacturer that sells cars in the U.S.) would be forced to provide good dealer service and offer a warranty comparable to American cars (100,000 miles). One has only to look at the incredible increase in the quality of both Mazda and Jaguar to witness the benefits of mergers with American auto manufacturers. Before Ford took over Jaguar, it was a joke as one of the most unreliable cars on the planet. Since Ford has taken it over, Jaguar has now become a world-class luxury car with the solid build quality that should be expected of such a car. The lowly Mazda pickup, once a rough-riding go-kart with seats that felt like a wooden picnic table (much like the Tacoma), has been transformed into a smooth riding and solid truck worthy of the name "truck". If GM should ever take over Toyota (a wonderful thought indeed) I might at that point actually consider looking at a Tacoma or Tundra. As for Honda, I hate to be a party-pooper, but they don't make trucks. The ridiculous Ridgeline is not a truck. It is a Pilot SUV with the roof chopped off over the rear seats and a little tiny pickup bed stuck back there. Its high side panels and low ride height make it totally impractical as a truck. No real truck has FRONT WHEEL DRIVE. That is a ludicrous idea. Both VW and Dodge tried that idea in the past and it was a total flop.