23rd Sep 2006, 09:40

I know a person with a 88 Ranger with almost 300,000 and it is original engine and transmission.

29th Sep 2006, 23:34

A Ford?!!! A Ranger, no less??? 300,000 miles??!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! As a current Ford owner, I can assure you that I understand why "Quality is Job 1," it's because it's problem number one. Last American car I'll own until the big 3 actually deserve my hard earned money. Toyota, here I come...

30th Sep 2006, 14:59

I would pay my $5-7000 more and certainly step up from small Rangers, Colorados/Toyotas etc. to a nice new or late model full size domestic truck and never look back. Which I have done. I have seen Toyota pretty eat up by road salt in the northeast. Also enough of the Ranger conversation if you have 7 extra grand spend it on a larger F/Silverado both are full size models instead of little toy trucks. I have had small and large pickups and theres no way I would spend the same money and have a small ride. My opinion of course and hopeful a useful recommendation for others looking at trucks. The gas is more, but I would rather the load and towing capacity and I also use my cars a lot as well so that's not really an issue in itself anyway.

1st Oct 2006, 18:45

First off, you're not spending "extra" money when you buy a Toyota. You are paying a fair price for a rock solid vehicle. If you spend 7,000 LESS, then you get a piece of crap Silverado or Ranger. To be fair, they both will run well for a while, but when you get over 100,000 miles on them, that is where the Toyota shines, because it still drives like day one, and the domestics are starting to cause you headaches and become costly.

1st Oct 2006, 19:50

Yes, I know people with over 300000 miles on their Fords. My uncle has a 88 F-150 with over 300000 miles.

24th Oct 2006, 13:38

I never keep a vehicle over 100,000 miles because I like for my cars and trucks to look new. As for problems, I only drive Rangers or GM trucks, so I never have any problems. No Ranger, Full-size Chevy or GMC is going to have any problems in 200,000 miles or more usually, but I like new vehicles. Two family members own companies that use the Ranger, as well as full-size Chevy and GMC vans, and the reason they use them is reliability and practically zero cost for maintenance. Japanese reliability is grossly over rated. They aren't any better than any other make.

27th Oct 2006, 16:40

I've seen American and Japanese trucks that are both just as reliable as the next, now American cars are another story... Yea Toyota trucks cost more, but have a hell of a lot better resale value... This is a straight fact that Toyota Tacoma holds 48% of value after five years... and Ford Ranger holds only 34% after five years... So if I buy my Tacoma for $24K and you buy your cheap Ranger for $20K which is a $4K dollar Differnce for about the same stuff... Come trade in time my Tacoma is worth $11520 and the Ranger is only worth $6800 dollars... a difference of $4720 bucks... So no loss on my part and I got a better truck, with a rust proof bed, that is newly designed compared to the Rangers 98' design... Time for something new Ford...

27th Oct 2006, 17:53

With the recalls on the Scion for bad airbags and the Highlander for a sticking accelerator, I'll take my chances with something that ISN'T made by Toyota!!

27th Oct 2006, 22:10

I have a home service business in which my vehicle is my most visible and most critical tool. Because of that, I don't keep a vehicle older than 10 years. Any well maintained vehicle of any make will easily last that long. Therefore, I buy trucks based on their capabilities for my work. I test drove every small pickup available, and decided on the Ford Ranger because of several reasons:

The Toyota Tacoma and Nissan Frontier with their independent rear suspension may be great for off-roading, and empty driving, but they don't handle a heavy high-riding load well.

The Dodge Dakota is way too gas-guzzling for 150+ miles a day.

The Chevy Colorado wasn't comfortable enough for the long drives.

The Mazda was the same as the Ford, but higher priced.

27th Oct 2006, 22:34

Uh...I suppose Toyota's recalls of 30,000 Scions for defective airbags and the trouble-prone Highlander SUV for accelerators that stick on the floor is another example of how well built they are. With that kind of "superior build quality" I'd feel safer in a 20 year old Yugo.

28th Oct 2006, 05:53

But if you keep your Tacoma and never sell it what is the resale? I would rather have a truck that saves my fillings from being replaced at the dentist.

15th Dec 2006, 21:17

I get a real kick out of the people who argue that resale is so much better for Toyota products. Not true. My friend who owns an independent used car/truck lot tells me that based on purchase price (NOT list, which is what all the Toyota fans are basing their figures on) the Ford Ranger actually returns a HIGHER percentage of its actual purchase price that an average, comparably equipped Tacoma during the first 3 years.

18th Dec 2006, 20:28

Anyone who knows anything about the vehicles sold in this country knows that Toyota's get better resale than anything else. This is not opinion, it is fact. Stop writing unfounded comments with no truth behind them. Domestic vehicles do not get as good a resale because they do not last as long.

19th Dec 2006, 12:11

Again the purchase price is overlooked??!!!

20th Dec 2006, 01:51

Toyotas are amazing vehicles. My uncle had prostate cancer. That same year, he bought a Toyota Tundra and bam, that same year the cancer was gone. He was cured. I think that it's mostly due in part to the Tundra. And the chemo too. I guess.

Also, the previous poster is right. Of course you'll get better resale, percentage-wise, if you pay more for your vehicle overall. Saying a Tacoma gets better resale value over a Ranger is like saying a Mercedes S55 gets better resale than an Audi S6 or something. Duh.

20th Dec 2006, 07:00

What if you paid $100,000 for the Mercedes and sold it for $80,000? What if you paid $10,000 for an economy car and sold it for $8000? What is the percentage?

20th Dec 2006, 14:07

That's fantastic... but it doesn't equate to the percentages between the Tacoma and Ranger. You're creating another scenario entirely. I'd also like to add that your alternate scenario does not justify the unjustifiably ludicrous cost disparity between the Ranger and the Tacoma. That particular aspect can be attributed to brainwashi...er...marketing from Toyota.

20th Dec 2006, 20:54

Actually I am a domestic owner that made the % comment. I would rather own the Ranger as well.

21st Dec 2006, 16:10

Well, I guess Toyota must have brainwashed me. They have succeeded in making me believe that my Tacoma should never break down, and it never does. They must have cast a spell on my truck, too, because it does exactly what I want it to every day and requires nothing, but gasoline to go wherever I want with no problems at all. However, I could have let Ford brainwash me with things like, "built Ford tough". That's true, it was tough s@#T for me during the ownership of my first and last Ford. Owning it did bring a new friend into my life though, and that was the mechanic that lived down the street. I visited him often. I haven't seen him once though since I bought my Tacoma, it will nice to be able to just drop in and visit now that I don't have to give him money every time I see him.