fuzzymoomoo Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 Tacoma has personality?...if personality means dated, nosy, rough riding and fuel inefficient, with a cheap interior...then I guess youre right...the ranger makes it look exactly what it is....extremely dated. Dont forget about the frames that break in half.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 Fuzzy...actually...the mere fact that it is available with a bed delete option, means its DEFINITELY on the agenda..... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rperez817 Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 Tacoma has personality?...if personality means dated, nosy, rough riding and fuel inefficient, with a cheap interior...then I guess youre right...the ranger makes it look exactly what it is....extremely dated. Yes sir Deanh, the Toyota Tacoma owners I know all say their "Taco" (as they call it) has character and personality. The truck is crude, but also very durable. The TRD Off Road version is very capable for off roading and mudding, too. Just as Assimilator said, Tacoma is sort of Toyota's Jeep Wrangler. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 Fuzzy...actually...the mere fact that it is available with a bed delete option, means its DEFINITELY on the agenda..... I will admit that when I saw that on the build schedule board in July I was very surprised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-dubz Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 Speaking of Jeep, wonder how the scrambler with affect the smaller truck market? It comes out shortly after the ranger I believe. Although I think it would hurt Tacoma or wrangler sales moreso then the ranger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 rperez….imagine if the Ranger was released and was antiquated,,,,,holy uproar Batman...theres a reason the Tacoma is as old school as it is...it had zero competition...improvement wasn't necessary... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assimilator Posted August 31, 2018 Share Posted August 31, 2018 (edited) Yeah, Tacoma has charm that comes with reputation and fandom. Personally I much prefer the Ford Ranger approach, the right balance of capability and modern sophistication...even if it has zero design personality. I think Bronco will strike the same balance but with much more style. Edited August 31, 2018 by Assimilator 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucelinc Posted August 31, 2018 Share Posted August 31, 2018 The 3.5 at least has been proven to be super durable. I know the internals are durable. However I am not sure about the turbos after 100,000 miles or so. Totally anecdotal but I hear a good number of the SHOs have leaking turbos or intercoolers filled with oil as they approach higher mileage. Maybe those issues have been solved in later models. As far as I know the 2.3 engines are bullet proof and have no issues with the turbo. While it might not be many, I still think some buyers are leery of a smaller turbo engine compared to a larger naturally aspirated one due the the perception of greater longevity and durability with more lightly stressed NA engine. My dealer tells me that most people who get the 5.0 rather than the ecoboost in an F150 do so for that reason. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted August 31, 2018 Share Posted August 31, 2018 I know the internals are durable. However I am not sure about the turbos after 100,000 miles or so. Totally anecdotal but I hear a good number of the SHOs have leaking turbos or intercoolers filled with oil as they approach higher mileage. Maybe those issues have been solved in later models. I forgot about that. Maybe fordtech1 can comment further on it, but I havent heard anything about that particular issue in the F-150 version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted August 31, 2018 Share Posted August 31, 2018 (edited) We know the 2.3 is being upgraded with steel crank and forged con rods so it looks like a good rework of the foundation, I just hope they have solved the block cracking issue around the base of the cylinder head bolts. Edited August 31, 2018 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted September 1, 2018 Share Posted September 1, 2018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted September 1, 2018 Share Posted September 1, 2018 I forgot about that. Maybe fordtech1 can comment further on it, but I havent heard anything about that particular issue in the F-150 version. There are some significant differences between the longitudinal and transverse EB35s (notably, the truck version doesn’t have the timing chain-driven water pump). There are a few complaints that pop up (and a few “usual suspects” who like to bitch and moan about the EB35), but its reputation is generally good for longevity, and I’d imagine that a lot of that comes from the system design not being compromised by the transverse packaging requirements. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted September 1, 2018 Share Posted September 1, 2018 I know the internals are durable. However I am not sure about the turbos after 100,000 miles or so. Totally anecdotal but I hear a good number of the SHOs have leaking turbos or intercoolers filled with oil as they approach higher mileage. Maybe those issues have been solved in later models. As far as I know the 2.3 engines are bullet proof and have no issues with the turbo. While it might not be many, I still think some buyers are leery of a smaller turbo engine compared to a larger naturally aspirated one due the the perception of greater longevity and durability with more lightly stressed NA engine. My dealer tells me that most people who get the 5.0 rather than the ecoboost in an F150 do so for that reason. I know its completely anecdotal, but I have two EB 3.5s in my family, one with 117k and the other with 176k. So far so good with those turbos. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted September 1, 2018 Share Posted September 1, 2018 Ford's absence certainly let Toyota Tacoma thrive. It's a little like Toyota's Wrangler more than F-150, it's a truly rugged and distinctive product with lots of customization and rugged amenities. The Ranger is a more sophisticated truck like the F-Series, but it doesn't quite have the same culture and personality as Tacoma...at least when you're talking about certain configs. It helps that Toyota Tacoma/4-Runner have a well earned reputation for being indestructible. In many ways, I'm sure Ford has drawn inspiration from Land Rover, Toyota, Jeep, and Subaru on their new rugged lineup. I think Ford has long been more interested in building a reputation for performance and technological sophistication over just simple and rugged, especially since they've been trying to overcome that old stigma of aging and primitive Detroit engineering. I wouldnt underestimate the durability of the T6 platform. Remember the origin of the Ranger has served in some pretty inhospitable places around the world and competes competently against the Hilux. Ive been to a few of those places and the Ranger is well represented. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted September 1, 2018 Share Posted September 1, 2018 (edited) Ford Ranger Raptor 2018 ultimate road test video From Birdsville to Bathurst in the blue oval's desert-buster. https://www.drive.com.au/video-cars/video-car-reviews/ford-ranger-raptor-2018-ultimate-road-test-video-119333.html?trackLink=homeVideos1 Edited September 1, 2018 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted September 1, 2018 Share Posted September 1, 2018 I know its completely anecdotal, but I have two EB 3.5s in my family, one with 117k and the other with 176k. So far so good with those turbos. Wait, do you have 117k on your Raptor? Or did you just not mention it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarneyFord Posted September 2, 2018 Share Posted September 2, 2018 I hope Ranger gives Tacoma some good competition. I like the turbo 2.3 in the lower end models. Some people need work trucks with a little power. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted September 2, 2018 Share Posted September 2, 2018 Wait, do you have 117k on your Raptor? Or did you just not mention it? Oh no, it doesnt get used that much, lol. I was referencing my two brother-in-laws work trucks but my nephew also has a first gen EB that is well over a 100k as well, which I failed to mention. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blksn8k2 Posted September 5, 2018 Share Posted September 5, 2018 We know the 2.3 is being upgraded with steel crank and forged con rods so it looks like a good rework of the foundation, I just hope they have solved the block cracking issue around the base of the cylinder head bolts. My biggest concerns are potential fuel mileage, or lack thereof, and long term reliability related to the fact that it will supposedly be direct injection only. IMO both of those issues will be a potential problem when you are using an engine with such small displacement in a 4x4 crewcab that could weigh close to 5000 lbs. Under certain conditions such as hilly terrain or heavy loads/towing the engine will be under boost for long periods of time which not only hurts fuel mileage but can also lead to increased engine heat, cylinder ring compression blow-by, etc. The PCV system could be recirculating higher levels of crankcase fumes into the intake tract which could increase the likelihood of oil deposits and carbon buildup. The lack of fuel in the intake tract means there will be nothing there to help wash away those deposits which could lead to reduced performance due to blocked air flow as well as damaged intake valves. I suspect that better performance is not the only reason why Ford and other manufacturers have gone to dual injection on many of their engines. Unless I missed something recently, I'm a bit surprised that Ford has not stated that the 2.3 EB will have dual injection. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.