Ranger vs Tacoma

[gw33gp]

My 02 4WD Ranger is getting close to the 100K mark and I have had zero problems with the front suspension. I do take it off-road but I don't beat the crap out of it. I also had an 89 4WD Ranger that I put almost almost 200K miles on. I liked it better for off-road adventures but it still required front end alignment periodically. I don't recall if I ever had the wheel bearings replaced but I did have them repacked with fresh grease a couple times.

Even though the SLA front suspension is not as desirable for off-road, it is still very capable off-road and I feel it has a slight advantage on paved roads.

My experience tells me that if a front wheel drive car has a hard to find front shimmy problem it is usually the wheel bearings. I imagine that would be true of 4WD vehicles also.

 

[pacodiablo]

Sorry but my experience tells me not to buy SLA vehicles.

Good luck with that. The newest TIB/TTB Rangers are 12 years old. SLA is the standard for all light duty vehicles these days, save for the Wrangler. The Econoline is the only vehicle still using TIB.

 

[Sevensecondsuv]

Good luck with that. The newest TIB/TTB Rangers are 12 years old. SLA is the standard for all light duty vehicles these days, save for the Wrangler. The Econoline is the only vehicle still using TIB.

Just because it's the standard doesn't mean it's better. It's been this way for a while. They have a good design and get rid of it for something far inferior just for the sake of change. Much like our current president.

I'd rather work on a 97 than drive a 98 (or 2008 for that matter). If it comes down to it I'll swap TTB/TIB into a newer truck.

When you shear a ball joint going 70 you'll think twice about driving an SLA vehicle simply because "that's what all the new vehicles have".

 

[Sunk]

If it comes down to it I'll swap TTB/TIB into a newer truck.

I see you think like me...

 

[tanbuddy]

the new 2wd superdutys use tib too.

 

[pacodiablo]

When you shear a ball joint going 70 you'll think twice about driving an SLA vehicle simply because "that's what all the new vehicles have".

Considering what the odds of that happening are, I'm not too concerned.

I've had three SLA suspension RBVs and never had issues with any of them.

 

[Nipplechops]

The 3.0 will most likely not be able to tow a car if that is what you plan on towing, you will be much happier with the 4.0 and have a stronger rear axle to go along with it.

I agree on the 4.0L statement, but I have towed more than cars (Case skid steer, Yukon Delta houseboat to name a couple) with my 2.8L V6/Toyo Kogyo 5 speed combo. If my piss pot 2.8L can do it, a 3.0L can do it and that much more.

For the record, just because it can, doesn't mean you should.

 

[Fast Fords]

If my piss pot 2.8L can do it, a 3.0L can do it and that much more.

For the record, just because it can, doesn't mean you should.

if my 2.3L can tow vehicles, i'm sure the 3.0L "cockroach" will do that times 90..you just have to know how to drive stick i guess..

 

[93rangerguy]

yea my next door neighbor has a 95 tacoma and hates it because when hes towing his 21 ft boat comming up from the ramp is a problem for the toyota just not enough power and hes starting to get frame rot to... import trucks i guess but the older trucks arent had with the 22r motor is a great motor i had a 3ich body lifted 85 toyota extra cab with 31's on it and it had enough power to get around the sand banks

 

[TinyBear]

I worked on school buses for two years straight (i am a Diesel mechanic). And as far as the SLA vs TIB debate id hate to say it but the TIB is a MAINTENCE WHORE.

most of the stuff i was working on were the short buses. We had a mixed fleet of around 90 GM 3500 van bodied buses and 150 E350 Van bodied buses.

The GM's were SLA and other than 1 set of ball joints (did not fail just had more play than allowed) and a shit load of front shocks and a few tie rods. As for the TIB fords well every 70,000kms reliably we replaced ball joints that had exceeded spec. Pluse the amount of drag links and tie rods we changed. I got good enuff to bable to replace all 4 ball joints and do the alignment on a e350 in under 3 hrs.

AS for RBV's. I have had a 1999 Ranger 2wd that other than an alignment at 100,000kms just cause never had any front end work done. I also had a 1996 4x4 Ranger that had 350,000kms on it but i dont know the full history (got it used with 270,000kms). That truck needed a steering box, ball joints and tie rod ends, BUT i KNOW for a fact that the ball joints had been replaced prior to me replacing them as they were not ford parts.

Now i have a 2008 Sport 2wd (same setup as the current 4wd). but with only 7000kms on it so far i cant make any comments on its setup. But in my mind all three setups worked just fine just rember to check em over periodically and i dont thinkyou can have an issue.

 

[Rob06]

Interesting topic
I too was looking at a 04 Tacoma or a 06 Ranger Sport 4.0L 5 speed 4x4...

I didnt know about the frame rot issue with the Toyota......

I decided on the Ranger - because I had great luck with past Rangers 1990 2.3L 5 speed 4x4.... 1997 3.0L 5 speed 4x4

I have pulled my sons 4.3 chev S10 (With Tow Bar) behind my 2.3L for 50 miles.....

I have pulled 1500lbs of concrete block in my trailer with 1000lbs in the bed with my 3.0L (Spooky) - The 3.0L was a great truck, 12 years old and no rust and origonal paint.... cant believe I tradded it for the 06

I agree it is near inpossible to break the Twin I-Beam on the older Rangers. I do think they are a BITCH to work on though (4x4)

Did you guys ever see the TOUGH TRUCK CHALANGE they had on TV years ago ????? They had people jumping STOCK trucks - Only the TIB could survive the pounding. It was inpressive to see how tough the TIB is......

I have only had the 4.0L for a few weeks and my only complaint is the 410 gearing...... The RPM is way to high on the hiway - Good for pulling a trailer BAD for GAS MILEAGE...... I miss my 3.73,s And I hate Rack n Pinion Steering - give me the old steering box pls

Rob

 

[DaNgErOus1998RaNgErOuS]

I have towed a dual axle car trailer with a four wheel drive s-10 and 2,000 pounds of scrap metal with my ranger. My truck is the 3.0 with 3.73 gearing and 31's! Yeah i know its way to much for my truck but it pulled it with no issues!

 

[ronclark]

Least year I rebuild my 87 4x4 ranger front axle, replaced all the rubbers, shocks, breaks, packed the bearings, outer tie rods and alignment.
just need a new steering box its all sloppy.
but boy can I say what a difference it makes on road and gravel roads. just a little love and you can get a really nice ride out of the old trucks

Nah, not just extreme offroading. On a TTB/TIB, you set the alignment, torque the wheel bearings to spec and then you can beat the living **** out of it for 100,000+ miles without anything going wrong.

On a 98+ SLA truck you'll be dealing with worn out ball joints, replacing CV shafts, shimmy gremlins that are near impossible to solve once they show up, rotors that shimmy after being on the truck for 10,000 miles and the list goes on and on. And if that doesn't convince you, look at the difference in price for a set of front wheel bearings for a 97 vs. a 98

Believe me, I've owned and worked on both setups. Everyone rags on the TTB because most of the old Fords you see are running around with negative camber due to spring sag. But once you set everything right the TTB/TIB will take a serious beating and not require maintenance for very long intervals. The SLA is just weaker, more problem prone, and just requires a lot more maintenance.

If your talking about getting a truck with less than 50k on it, it's probably not a big deal. But if you're talking about the 150k variety, the TTB/TIB will be far fewer headaches and annoyances.

FWIW, the toy's had solid axles up to like 85? Then they switched to SLA. Ford was the last hold out going to 98 before switching. Some things just get worse the newer they get.

 

[Shawnski]

Seriously, the SLA with its Rack and Pinion is simply safer and better handling than the Twin I-beam on the road. Lousy with wheel travel yes, but on the road, the SLA is like a sports car by comparison.

To the average consumer the SLA is less problematic during the first 5 years of ownership, with more predictable handling. The Twin I beam is deffinately hard-core...I always wanted to do a pre-runner lifted 2wd TIB set-up!

I also get 17 mpg with my Ranger pulling my 3000lb '80 Fairmont AutoX car (tow-bar).

 

[Will]

There's nothing wrong with SLA. It's been the standard for about 50 years. It's got the same balljoints as TIB/TTB. The TIB/TTB handles like hell in comparison. If you are used to towing with an SLA and then you jump in an F250 with the same load and hit a curve at the speeds you are used to, you will be biting chunks of foam out of the seat cushion. Even the little bit of non-symetric steering geometry is noticable with a 7,500# trailer in a curve. WHen you are used to the SLA, the truck pretty much finds it's way around the curve. With the TTB, you start inputting some steering and the truck seems like it wants to push outside and you want to turn it some more, and you have actual pressure on the wheel and are afraid maybe you are going to trip it up or drive right off the shoulder. I'm sure you get used to that, but in a direct compare, which I have done, there is no comparison over which feels better. The mono-beam is just fine, the TTB/TIB sucks. I would definately get a newer Ranger for anything except serious offroading.

One more thing you should try--driving an extended 15-pax Club Wagon, like they use for church vans, in a heavy crosswind. You are better off just tying the seatbelt through the steering wheel and crawling the back to pray. When you go into an under-pass you never know which way it's going to steer itself, and when you come back out, you don't know which lane it's going to be in.