8th Jan 2007, 20:59

Don't forget that Toyota (and Honda) use a less-than-ethical method for figuring their advertised horsepower ratings. The advertised horsepower of these engines is actually about 20% less than the advertised horsepower if you use the same method domestic manufacturers use to calculate theirs. The 4.0 Ford engines actually put out slightly more real horsepower than the 4.0 Toyotas do. The Tacoma's real horsepower is more like 185-190. The advertised 240 horsepower Accords have more like 190-200.

9th Jan 2007, 17:37

The 4.0 Tacoma puts out 266 ft lbs of torque at 4000 rpm.

If you compare that to similar domestics, it is in the ballpark. Also of note is Chevy's big bad diesel is (sorry folks) engineered by the Japanese.

9th Jan 2007, 19:03

That's right. Isuzu designs the Chevy diesels. Since Chevy makes all of the frames for Isuzu, they had to give them something to do. Isuzu would have gone extinct by now had GM not come and picked them up.

10th Jan 2007, 20:07

Apparently, the last word is the name of the game here. Todays business pages report that Ford wants to eliminate 38'000 hourly workers and 10,000 white collar jobs by September of this year. G M is cutting 34,000 more hourly and 3000 white collar. Chrysler went from 126'000 jobs six years ago to 82,500 today. The Big 3 domination of the U.S. market went from 73% in 1995 to 60% in 2005. Meanwhile, the Japanese have created hundreds of thousands of jobs in the U. S over the last several years building their brands in America. The irony is that the number of people employed making cars and trucks has remained fairly constant. Toyota has knocked off Chrysler and is close to taking over Ford as the number two maker in the world. This isn't bull, these are facts. I am not defending the Japanese as much as I am lamenting the demise of the American automotive industry.

21st Feb 2007, 03:36

I agree with a lot of people here. I bought a 06 Tacoma access cab 4x4 six speed manual and I enjoy the truck. Since I will not be hauling any big except surf boards and snowboards I decided that I did not need a full size truck. I chose the Tacoma over the Ford Ranger because I felt the Tacoma was a little bigger and since I am tall the interior is much more comfortable. I would love to get a Ford F150 but when looking at a one they do cost 30 grand just for a nice four wheel drive extended cab. Toyota is nice because as a recent college grad they are affordable. I do admit domesic trucks are superior and look great when lifted. I will probably end up trading the Tacoma in for a Ford a few years down the road.

11th Jul 2007, 13:05

Funny to see people writing that " Well- your little Tacoma can't do real work because the frame and engine are puny compared to my Ford Dually F-250 Diesel"

Let me say that I have perhaps the cheapest, smallest, lightest Tacoma model they make; a 96' taco with 4-banger engine and generic 5 speed manual tranny. Despite this, I bought it 12 years ago to haul lawn mowing equipment. I hauled a trailer with 2 riding mowers while I had the rest of the equipment in the bed. I did this for years and the truck did it not only just fine, but I could actually keep right up with traffic in the fastlane and still had plenty of acceleration.

I now use it as a commuter truck, but also race riding mowers on the weekend. During the week I drive it 60 miles to work. More importantly, most of the time I'm in the fast lane, going 80MPH right along with the Bimmers, Mercedes, and Porsches. Absolutely no problems keeping up or even going as fast as I care to. It actually handles very well for an econo truck and better than some nicer cars I've owned. On weekends I drive 3 hours away with a racing riding mower, a welder, all my tools, my gear and stuff in the bed. Doesn't even bog it down.

As far as using aluminum and so on; my engine now has around 220,000 miles on it. So far it doesn't leak or burn any oil. It still runs quiet and doesn't even show any visible signs of wear. The same goes for everything else: the frame, suspension, interior, and drivetrain all look and perform as if they were still new, and this is despite the fact that I drive it HARD and actually use it to haul things.

But if you compare apples to apples here- the Ford Ranger; first of all, Ford is discontinuing the Ranger because it sells poorly. The Ranger is almost a joke these days because they NEVER redesigned it after it's last overhaul save for some trim here and there. My brother had one and the acceleration was god-awful. I think it was 90 HP? It was scary taking the thing on the freeway because you almost had to get out of the way of oncoming traffic. It finally grenaded the transmission after 150k, which was amazing since I never imagined it'd make it that far. The Tacoma walked all over the Ranger and it was Ford's fault for ignoring the small truck market. I imagine GM will be next.

16th Jul 2007, 15:22

To the guy talking about how the Tacoma won't tow as much as a for 5.4 or a dodge 5.7 hemi... You compare those trucks to the tundra which can tow up to 10,800 pounds. and you compare a Tacoma to a ford ranger which can tow what?... a 12 pack of Pepsi?

3rd Dec 2008, 17:38

Well... 1 year ago I bought a 2006 4x4 access... It is a fantastic truck, and yes it is as smooth as a car. I can go places where my uncles F-15's cannot.

My dad has a 97 Tacoma.. changed the brakes once in 260,000.. my uncle changed his in 36000, my other uncle, major power train problems after 55000..

My neighbor's 96 Tacoma has 480,000 km, had to change the tranny, but no real other issues.

My dad took his bed liner off this summer (cause there was a Toyota thing where they were offering the price of the vehicle if there was rust under the liner), not a spot. Yes I know they are lemons.. maybe my uncles had lemons, but one uncle who swore never to buy a Japanese, has bought a 5.7 litre Tundra.

I know a lot of Japanese are made here now, but why all the problems with eh domestics? I was gonna buy a Ranger to be honest, but their mileage sucks for what you get.. I'd rather drive a 236 hp 4 litre and get 18-23, than a Ranger with no power at 17 mpg.

Oh, I work in construction.. Lots of drywall, and plaster boxes, and I have never bottomed out yet. but what I do I know.. just my 2 cents.