Jump to content

New Facebook Pages

Ford Mach E

Ford Thunder

  • Custom Search


MY93SHO

TFL Ranger/ Taco tow test

Recommended Posts

 

 

Edited by MY93SHO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, the Toyota sets the bar and Ranger meets it and moves it up just a smidgen higher....with more comfort and more interior room. I can attest to the Tacoma's (in my opinion) odd seating placement....seems like you are both sitting on the floor and hitting your head at the same time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know why they're surprised the taco pulled as well as it did. 278 hp is 278 hp no matter how you slice it. So long the ecm doesn't drastically pull timing and the transmission can keep the engine at it's peak, it's going to make it's way up the mountain in about the same elapsed time as any other 275ish hp truck (like the ranger) pulling the same load.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, twintornados said:

So, the Toyota sets the bar and Ranger meets it and moves it up just a smidgen higher....with more comfort and more interior room. I can attest to the Tacoma's (in my opinion) odd seating placement....seems like you are both sitting on the floor and hitting your head at the same time.

My father-in-law is a Toyota guy and had several Tacoma’s, and I always felt that way about their seating.  I never liked that feeling.

On a sidenote, he recently traded in his 2014 Tundra on a 2018 Tundra and was disappointed about Toyota’s decontenting. It was the same option package as his last truck, which contained less festures on the new one. The point is, Ford isn’t the only one that does it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done Ford, Ranger is gonna turn a lot of heads around in this segment. The conscripted global truck may not be perfect for North America but it gives Ford a strong presence in the segment for the next few years while they work out exactly what’s needed. While they advertise 7500 lbs max towing, you can see that’s not practical or possible when complying to to regulations, 5,000 lbs is the real limit and Ranger does  that easily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sevensecondsuv said:

I don't know why they're surprised the taco pulled as well as it did. 278 hp is 278 hp no matter how you slice it. So long the ecm doesn't drastically pull timing and the transmission can keep the engine at it's peak, it's going to make it's way up the mountain in about the same elapsed time as any other 275ish hp truck (like the ranger) pulling the same load.

You can tell the Taco is Japanese, 5500 rpm the whole way. Ranger was 41-4200 rpm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At altitude, naturally aspirated engines lose a lot more horsepower than turbo engines and by the time vehicles reach the top of the run they lose something like 33% of their power. I was just reading this in an old review they did on the 2015 Escalade.

Edited by jpd80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wonder how well the Taco would have done if the load was greater than 5000 lbs-or is that the Taco's max tow rating?. 

Also surprised they gave the Ranger the nod as it seemed to me every chance they got they took a negative shot at Ranger.- In particular the guy with the Indiana Jones hat and the 2 lb  ring.  He was describing the front end of both trucks and he referred to the Taco as..." rugged, macho" or words to that effect while he described the Ranger as "something you would take to a tea party"..."So what do you want-refined vs. macho" At that point I thought-"well I know where this is going."

Surprised they called it for the Ranger as I thought they made it a point to find fault with the Ranger every chance they got.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob, that limit was because of gross combined weight rating for Tacoma, I think they were saying it had 1,000 lbs max payload  which was split across 500 lbs trailer tongue weight and both of them in the cabin... I remember them saying that Ranger had 1,350 lbs max payload, so maybe that means it could tow more than 5,000 lbs? I don't know but it sure made light work of it.:)

Edited by jpd80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should have also included a quarter mile drag race with that 5000 lbs in tow.  How quickly does each get up to speed would be more important to me than how many times the driver had to tap the brake going DOWN the mountain.  Glaring omission to me.   I think the Ranger would have won the drag race contest.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, MY93SHO said:

You can tell the Taco is Japanese, 5500 rpm the whole way. Ranger was 41-4200 rpm.

I guess it has nothing to do with a 6 speed vs 10 speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, blwnsmoke said:

I guess it has nothing to do with a 6 speed vs 10 speed.

Does it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Much more to do with the power curve of the turbo.  Peak torque is reached much lower in the rpm scale than the naturally aspirated Taco.   The Taco NEEDS RPM to make power while the Ranger is closer to diesel torque peak.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, blwnsmoke said:

I guess it has nothing to do with a 6 speed vs 10 speed.

All the tests I've seen on Ike Gauntlet over the years have shown atmo engines rev higher and the turbo engines rev less, even backing out of the throttle because exceeding the speed limit.. Atmo engines lose about 5% power per every 1,000 ft of elevation.

Edited by jpd80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like his major beef was with how his head kept hitting the roof of the Taco but not the Ranger.

Of course, the Taco had a sunroof, which automatically takes 2" off the available headroom.  Surprised they did not mention that. You could totally see the huge depression for the sunroof in the video.

All in all, the Ranger is a bit more refined in most aspects it seems, especially at the limit.  I do agree about the styling though, it is a bit generic / soft compared to other trucks or even other Fords.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Anthony said:

Looks like his major beef was with how his head kept hitting the roof of the Taco but not the Ranger.

Of course, the Taco had a sunroof, which automatically takes 2" off the available headroom.  Surprised they did not mention that. You could totally see the huge depression for the sunroof in the video.

All in all, the Ranger is a bit more refined in most aspects it seems, especially at the limit.  I do agree about the styling though, it is a bit generic / soft compared to other trucks or even other Fords.

They measured the door frames top to bottom and found something like two inches more height in the Ranger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, jpd80 said:

They measured the door frames top to bottom and found something like two inches more height in the Ranger

I'm not standing up for the Taco by any means, but door frame height is not a qualifier for headroom.  That's just the opening.

They used a lot of redneck reviewing techniques (and not to mention Vick's VapoRub for grease?)

Granted, I would not even consider the Taco, but that was not a very well thought out or executed test.  I think a well thought out test would show the Ranger is even better than the TFL tests show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s entertainment, not science!  Give ‘em a break.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those two definitely filled up the cabs well.,

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, akirby said:

It’s entertainment, not science!  Give ‘em a break.

That's what I keep telling my uncle about WWE, but he just doesn't listen.  🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Anthony said:

I'm not standing up for the Taco by any means, but door frame height is not a qualifier for headroom.  That's just the opening.

They used a lot of redneck reviewing techniques (and not to mention Vick's VapoRub for grease?)

Granted, I would not even consider the Taco, but that was not a very well thought out or executed test.  I think a well thought out test would show the Ranger is even better than the TFL tests show.

They only began measuring door frame height after both testers noticed reduced head room, it's a strong indicator that head room will be less.

Using Vick's as grease is hilarious and should have been the giveaway to anyone watching...

They have a standardized testing  and scoring system for down hill and uphill tests that includes maximum towing testing but does not exceed things like gross combined weight - that means that the towing weight is limited by the lesser truck.  Ranger might have been able to tow more but all that would have done is mucked up the down hill speed control test  with number of brake applications increasing and possibly make Ranger slower than Tacoma going up  the hill, a heavier weight would also have made Ranger's fuel economy look worse than Taco's.

There is an understandable methodology behind their tests and if you look at it, they're actually promoting safe operation of trucks by not exceeding things like speed limits and typical max towing loads - a bit of education on trailer tongue load and calculating actual gross combined weight so you don't exceed it....Ranger would permit four in the cabin while towing 5,000 lbs where as Taco maybe wouldn't.

Edited by jpd80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Anthony said:

I'm not standing up for the Taco by any means, but door frame height is not a qualifier for headroom.  That's just the opening.

They used a lot of redneck reviewing techniques (and not to mention Vick's VapoRub for grease?)

Granted, I would not even consider the Taco, but that was not a very well thought out or executed test.  I think a well thought out test would show the Ranger is even better than the TFL tests show.

Tacoma's poor seating position and ergonomics are no secret... sunroof or not, it has less headroom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×