Is the Ranger the Hilux we've been wanting?

[Dalko43]

Yeah it doesn't matter how you feel about the Tacoma's 14 year old frame design, the motor they put in it now is a non starter for me. In fact I feel the Tacoma sucks because of it and I have owned 4 of them (2 first gens and 2 second gens). Toyota needs to put a truck engine back in the Tacoma!

The frame may look the same but it is a newer design using newer materials. I would love to see the Tacoma go fully boxed, but I honestly don't consider the C-channel frame to be a limiting factor for payload or longterm durability.

The 3.5l v6 on the other hand...I totally agree with you. It's not a truck engine. Toyota needs to figure a better solution for the longterm.

 

[Dalko43]

You say that like it's a bad thing?

No, he is very much right...America's "truck culture" is more fascinated with 0-60 times, heated seats, and update infotainment systems....the rest of the world is more focused on range/efficiency, working capabilities and durability.

There is a tremendous difference in how we use trucks in North America compared to the rest of the world...sure, there are plenty of North American owners who put their trucks to legitimate use, but for everyone of those there are 10 others who simply use them to drive to Burger King.

Culturally, there is a huge difference between how we view trucks and how the rest of the world views them...and those differences aren't all good. When fuel prices finally go back up, you're going to see a lot of "truck owners" ditching their vehicles for something more practical.

 

[DorB]

The Tacoma actually uses the same rear axle as the Hilux (8.8"). .

I think Lockers and axles shafts and suspension parts are mostly not interchangeable so it’s not identical in different costume.







Slowly..

 

[Hilldweller]

....

There is a tremendous difference in how we use trucks in North America compared to the rest of the world......

'Merica, f-yeah

 

[Dalko43]

I think Lockers and axles shafts and suspension parts are mostly not interchangeable so it’s not identical in different costume.







Slowly..

More than a few auto journalists (4x4-focused) have commented on how the Tacoma's 8.8" rear axle is very similar to the one used by the Hilux, 4runner/LC Prado. Exactly the same? Perhaps not, but very similar nonetheless in terms of design and materials.

This is nothing new by the way...it's been discussed for quite some time.

 

[Dalko43]

Dampened tailgate is not an offroad feature. Everytime I hear people complain about that I LOL, is that what we've become? The tailgate is aluminum and weighs nothing, I can throw it up with one arm very easily. I always think about what old old timer in an old Powerwagon or FJ45 pickup would say about some of us.....jiminy xmas.

Lol, if us Toyota fans are getting 'soft' for wanting a dampened tailgate, what does that say about the average 1/2 ton (to include F-150) owner who has come to expect power-everything and 360-degree camera's and massaging seats?

Dampened tailgate is NOT an "offroad" feature, but it is a logical one...sort of like adjustable headlights (which Toyota was also an early adopter of). I'd rather have the tailgate fall slowly than slam down every time I have to open it...it's a peace of mind thing.

If offroad is what your after, and you want the holy grail FJ7X pickup like all Toyota fans (I used to be one), it's won't have any of that nanny stuff you speak of. Like you say, it's stuff a lot of midsized owners want (who never go offroad), not what makes it a better truck.

Part of the reason the Toyota has better articulation is due to it's softer suspension. A FJ7X and Gwagon both have horrible articulation, guess why.

Yes, softer suspension plays a role in articulation, though oddly enough during a TFL tow test with the Tacoma and Ranger, the weighed-down Tacoma had more space between its axle and the bump stops compared to the weighed-down Ranger:

For what it's worth (not much), the ranger has multi terrain mode, "crawl control" (Ford calls is trail control or something), manual shift mode and all that fancy stuff I don't care about. It has 4h/4l and a selectable locker.

The Ranger has a lower crawl ratio, you conveniently left that out, pretty significant, 47.X vs 36:X. It also has better sight lines, which was a determining factor for me.

Does the Ranger truly have a manual shift mode? Or does the system only allow you to set upper and lower gear limits...there's a big difference. Manual shift mode is definitely preferred for technical offroading and hard towing.

Crawl control (for both the Ranger and Tacoma) is a gimicky feature that I don't care too much for either. However, ATRAC (available on the MT Tacoma's and many 4runners and Tundra's) is not a gimmick...it replicates the functionality of a mechanical locker by actuating the brakes. A mechanical locker is obviously preferred, but ATRAC paired with a rear locker will get you just about anywhere as long as you know what you're doing.

Neither pickup was "designed" for offroad in the same way a Patrol, 70 series or Gwagon are. They have offroad features are both robust platforms, but designed primarily for road use. Tacoma and Ranger are much closer related than say a Tacoma is to a 70 series ute.

The 70 series isn't nearly as capable offroad as the hype would have you believe. Some well-known 70 series owners (Andrew St. Pierre White and Ronny Dahl) have made some specific comments about the 70's front axle articulation, or lack thereof. It's prized, first and foremost, for its durability.

The Tacoma definitely isn't in the same league as the 70 series, based on a number of factors. But for the IFS midsized truck category, it arguably has set the offroading benchmark...that's a subjective assessment on my part, but I'm definitely not the only one who has that view.

 

[DaveInDenver]

More than a few auto journalists (4x4-focused) have commented on how the Tacoma's 8.8" rear axle is very similar to the one used by the Hilux, 4runner/LC Prado. Exactly the same? Perhaps not, but very similar nonetheless in terms of design and materials.

The 2010+ Prado and 4Runner use the 208mm (8.2") axles. The IMV trucks (e.g. Hilux) and some 16+ Tacoma use the 225mm (8.75") axle. The Tacoma uses an Eaton/Harrop locker (not the traditional Toyota e-locker) when equipped.

Not all Tacomas use the 225mm diff. The manual transmission models have the 225mm diff while automatic transmission models have the 208mm with the exception of TRD Offroad, all of which have 225mm axles. So the axles are common in the Toyota family to some extent.

As for the Hilux vs Tacoma axle, as I mentioned earlier the two trucks do not share the same track width so the axles are not likely to be identical. The Tacoma track is more than 2 inches wider.

 

[Deleted member 9101]

There is a tremendous difference in how we use trucks in North America compared to the rest of the world.

There is also a tremendous difference in the quality of the roads in North America compared to the rest of the world. We don't have cities and towns connected by unmaintained dirt roads, nor do we have water crossings on highways.

Also, most people (myself included) drive their trucks to work and use them as a family vehicle in North America. Just because you see nothing in the bed or behind it during the week doesn't mean that it doesn't get "worked."

I own ~374 acres of citrus groves and I have a 2wd truck on street tires and it does every single thing I ask of it. Like most Americans I have absolutely no use what so ever for the trucks that are for sale in overseas markets, none of them do what I need.

Your fuel economy comment made me giggle, the only place I have seen someone say that they don't care about fuel economy is on this website. What's even funnier is many of the North American trucks get better fuel economy than trucks sold over seas, while being more comfortable, safer, and ecologically cleaner.

As for 0-60 times... What's wrong with having a truck that is capable of accelerating when needed? Do you like only being able to hit 45 at the top of an on ramp?

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Yes, softer suspension plays a role in articulation, though oddly enough during a TFL tow test with the Tacoma and Ranger, the weighed-down Tacoma had more space between its axle and the bump stops compared to the weighed-down Ranger:

The Ranger is kind of weird in that it doesn't have much room between the bumpstop and axle even at rest. It has weird "parabolic" springs and I still don't really understand how they work. TFL commented on how little room they had when loaded on the Ranger towing video but also mentioned that the truck didn't really look like it was squatting. I found that intriguing so I checked it out on the first Ranger I found in real life... like 1.5-2" of clearance with the empty truck just sitting there. I think it is some really wacky variable rate spring that kinda goes against the norms as far as wheel travel vs load.

No, he is very much right...America's "truck culture" is more fascinated with 0-60 times, heated seats, and update infotainment systems....the rest of the world is more focused on range/efficiency, working capabilities and durability.

There is a tremendous difference in how we use trucks in North America compared to the rest of the world...sure, there are plenty of North American owners who put their trucks to legitimate use, but for everyone of those there are 10 others who simply use them to drive to Burger King.

Culturally, there is a huge difference between how we view trucks and how the rest of the world views them...and those differences aren't all good. When fuel prices finally go back up, you're going to see a lot of "truck owners" ditching their vehicles for something more practical.

My area kind of skews it, farm area there a lot of trucks that work for a living. When times get rough (like they are now) guys just keep what they have and do without payments.

Losing my '150 would be like losing an arm. Wife buries her car in snow trying to get from our house on our gravel road to the highway... go get the truck to pull her out and drive her to town. Need to ferry wagons around, go get the truck. Need to haul a tractor town, go get the truck. Need to pull fertilizer buggy out from the co-op... go get the truck. It is like a one stop butt kicking shop and it would really be not cool to have it. I have thought about a Ranger to replace it because they do have similar ratings... but for the weird ag stuff I do I don't know how it would be since it has a lot less lead in its @$$ for pulling stuff with lots or no tongue weight and nothing but the car trailer has brakes.

 

[Dalko43]

The 2010+ Prado and 4Runner use the 208mm (8.2") axles. The IMV trucks (e.g. Hilux) and some 16+ Tacoma use the 225mm (8.75") axle. The Tacoma uses an Eaton/Harrop locker (not the traditional Toyota e-locker) when equipped.

Not all Tacomas use the 225mm diff. The manual transmission models have the 225mm diff while automatic transmission models have the 208mm with the exception of TRD Offroad, all of which have 225mm axles. So the axles are common in the Toyota family to some extent.

As for the Hilux vs Tacoma axle, as I mentioned earlier the two trucks do not share the same track width so the axles are not likely to be identical. The Tacoma track is more than 2 inches wider.

I did say similar, didn't I? With all the emphasis that Toyota places on QDR and manufacturing optimization, are we really going to pretend that Toyota uses completely different components and design philosophies between the Hilux and Tacoma for axle and chassis components? Even if one model uses axle shafts slightly shorter than the other's, the basic design and engineering that goes into both are no doubt very similar. Also, I did raise the point of how different axle hubs and offset wheels might affect track width...are we sure that the track width difference is purely due to different dimensions of the axle housing?

The actual lockers I know are different, but those components are fairly easy to modify for different applications. The axles and some other chassis components do have a lot in common.

 

[Dalko43]

There is also a tremendous difference in the quality of the roads in North America compared to the rest of the world. We don't have cities and towns connected by unmaintained dirt roads, nor do we have water crossings on highways.

Yes, but the whole reason why Ford's "new" Ranger got so much fanfare, and the whole reason that iconic vehicles like the Jeep Wrangler and Power Wagon are so praised and valued is because of their offroad prowess. Even if most owners have no intention of ever going offroad, they're buying the vehicle because of its potential...similar to most sports car owners.

So there may be no real need for a robust, 3rd-world capable offroader...but there sure as hell is a demand for one.

Also, most people (myself included) drive their trucks to work and use them as a family vehicle in North America. Just because you see nothing in the bed or behind it during the week doesn't mean that it doesn't get "worked."

I think different people have different understandings of the word "worked."
Someone who drives his/her truck to haul construction gear on a daily basis is truly "working" the truck...and he/she will continue to own that truck even if fuel prices go up.
Someone who drives his/her truck to drop kids off at school and go play on a dirt road every other month might be "working" their truck in some fashion, but it's not the same sort of work.

In the North American market, OEM's are increasingly catering their designs to the latter (at least in the midsized and 1/2 ton segments).

Your fuel economy comment made me giggle, the only place I have seen someone say that they don't care about fuel economy is on this website. What's even funnier is many of the North American trucks get better fuel economy than trucks sold over seas, while being more comfortable, safer, and ecologically cleaner.

When did I say that I don't care about fuel economy?

Your 2 points on North American trucks being more fuel efficient and ecologically cleaner are very much up for debate. Tell me how a Ram 2500 or F-250 gasser averaging 11 mpg is somehow cleaner/better than an overseas diesel Ranger or Hilux averaging 23-24 mpg?

As for 0-60 times... What's wrong with having a truck that is capable of accelerating when needed? Do you like only being able to hit 45 at the top of an on ramp?

The problem is OEM's cater to the bro's who want speed and power but sacrifice efficiency and, to some degree, longevity. There has been little improvement in the efficiency of the 3/4 ton segment (for both gasoline and diesel) over the last few years...that's largely due to the OEM's d$%k measuring contest to see who can claim the highest HP and torque ratings.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

The problem is OEM's cater to the bro's who want speed and power but sacrifice efficiency and, to some degree, longevity. There has been little improvement in the efficiency of the 3/4 ton segment (for both gasoline and diesel) over the last few years...that's largely due to the OEM's d$%k measuring contest to see who can claim the highest HP and torque ratings.

EPA screwed up the efficiency of the diesels and for gassers if you need 400hp you are going to feed 400hp.

Variable displacement engines and small boosted V6's (Ecoboosts) would show no economy advantage lugging around a 12k service truck over current offerings. And would be less reliable.

 

[DaveInDenver]

I did say similar, didn't I? With all the emphasis that Toyota places on QDR and manufacturing optimization, are we really going to pretend that Toyota uses completely different components and design philosophies between the Hilux and Tacoma for axle and chassis components? Even if one model uses axle shafts slightly shorter than the other's, the basic design and engineering that goes into both are no doubt very similar. Also, I did raise the point of how different axle hubs and offset wheels might affect track width...are we sure that the track width difference is purely due to different dimensions of the axle housing?

The actual lockers I know are different, but those components are fairly easy to modify for different applications. The axles and some other chassis components do have a lot in common.

They are willing to make completely different frames from the front doors rearward, different sheet metal stamping, completely different interiors, unique engine and the Prado/4Runner have rear disc brakes which the Tacoma and Hilux do not. The Hilux still uses traditional shackles and inboard mounted shocks like 79+ trucks did. The Tacoma has tension shackles and mounts the shocks outside the frame.

Why would you then assume Toyota might not also use a thinner wall axle tube or otherwise tailor the truck to North America? My assumption is the axles are lighter duty.

The front end is unique to Tacoma, like I've mentioned, the ball joint taper is different since they presumably use a domestic supplier, so global control arms, ball joints and spindles are not interchangeable without swapping everything. The geometry is the same, though.

 

[DaveInDenver]

Like most Americans I have absolutely no use what so ever for the trucks that are for sale in overseas markets, none of them do what I need.

I think I am unlike other Americans in that I do want a Hilux primarily because I want the simplicity. I'd prefer the infotainment center to not control everything, want crank windows and a stick shift is all. I don't have a GoPro and don't have a phone that needs syncing to anything. Blah. I do like having V6 and air conditioning. I was wrong to not have it all those years with the '91... Honestly, an SR Tacoma 4 cylinder isn't that far off the mark if the frame was just a *bit* more rigid in the rear half and I could skip some of the technocrap.

 

[Deleted member 9101]

Your 2 points on North American trucks being more fuel efficient and ecologically cleaner are very much up for debate. Tell me how a Ram 2500 or F-250 gasser averaging 11 mpg is somehow cleaner/better than an overseas diesel Ranger or Hilux averaging 23-24 mpg?




The problem is OEM's cater to the bro's who want speed and power but sacrifice efficiency and, to some degree, longevity.

Compare apples to apples, not a 3/4 ton to a mid sized. You seem to miss the fact that US trucks have to meet some of the most stringent emissions standards in the world.

As for speed and power: my truck runs mid 13's in the 1/4 mile and has a life time average of 20.9 MPG. I get 24-25 on the HW and have zero worries about longevity. In fact, motors built today will last exponentially longer than previous generations.