# Toyotas in the Woods



## slowp (Sep 7, 2010)

How do you like them? Or would you get something better? I'm thinking after scraping and hitting the bottom of my little 2 wheel drive Chevy yesterday. I was on one of the *better *roads, looking for huckleberries. No damage that I know of to the Chevy.

Do you get good clearance on the newer ones? We have a lot of :censored:
"driveable" water bars and little washouts to negotiate if you get off the main tourist roads. My Subaru hits too. 

Seems like you either need a 4x4 or a trail motorcycle to get around anymore, and The Used Dog can't ride on a motorcycle.


----------



## 2dogs (Sep 7, 2010)

It is hard to go wrong with a Toyota. They are over priced and get poor gas mileage but good reliable transportation.


----------



## forestryworks (Sep 7, 2010)

slowp said:


> How do you like them? Or would you get something better? I'm thinking after scraping and hitting the bottom of my little 2 wheel drive Chevy yesterday. I was on one of the *better *roads, looking for huckleberries. No damage that I know of to the Chevy.
> 
> Do you get good clearance on the newer ones? We have a lot of :censored:
> "driveable" water bars and little washouts to negotiate if you get off the main tourist roads. My Subaru hits too.
> ...



Have you considered a mild lift kit for your 2wd? There is a good kit for $400 for your rig. Raises the front 2.5" and the rear 1.5"


----------



## ChainsawmanXX (Sep 7, 2010)

Them Mitsubishi Samurai, would be great little buggy's for in the woods too! A good set of tires alittle lift kit and the wheel base is so short its easy to get around the trees.. I think with a blade and a winch on one of them you could make a nice little skidder out of one too!


----------



## brokenbudget (Sep 7, 2010)

ChainsawmanXX said:


> Them Mitsubishi Samurai, would be great little buggy's for in the woods too! A good set of tires alittle lift kit and the wheel base is so short its easy to get around the trees.. I think with a blade and a winch on one of them you could make a nice little skidder out of one too!



never heard of a mitsubishi samurai. do you mean suzuki samurai?
if so, yes they are pretty good, just a little small to carry anything out other than you and a saw.


----------



## Johndirt82 (Sep 7, 2010)

This was my desert trail/ woods wagon. Too bad the illegals stole it from my house in sandiego. the 89-93 toyotas are hard to beat


----------



## Blakesmaster (Sep 7, 2010)

Can't say much for the newer Yota's as far as trail capabilities but the older ones are fantastic. This is my bro's 93 with a 3 inch lift and 32 inch tires. It'll go almost anywhere. My 88 4Runner is nothing to be ashamed of either. Both are great on and off the road.


----------



## Adkpk (Sep 7, 2010)

*4 runners rock*

The 4 Runner in the front is eating the 4 Runner in the back. If digestion goes well the 4 runner in the front will have lost 130000 mi.. In other words I am switching out the good stuff from my old 4 Runner to better the new 4 runner with only 86000 mi.. They're a solid ride and real good in the woods. Expensive to fix but I don't mind cause it's a quality item. Old ones are totally affordable. I got that one for $3000.


----------



## 2dogs (Sep 7, 2010)

I don't think slowp is looking for a rock crawler or a project. She is looking for a 4x4 with better ground clearence than her present 4x2. A Toyota trucj should be practical for several years. 

For info I drive a Dodge. Mizz p I think you would be better served by having a 3/4 ton diesel regular cab pickup truck. Dog will like it much better and there is more room inside for the shotgun and machete, standard tools for the zombie apocalypse.


----------



## dingeryote (Sep 7, 2010)

I hate to say it, but small trucks, Toyota is about the only thing that will hold up worth a darn anymore. Like the guys have said, the older 'Yotas had better drivelines and were more robust than the newer models though, and they DO get crappy milage for a 4 cyl.

I don't quite understand Chevy and thier complete lack of ground clearence either.
Our 4wd 2500HD unloaded, has about the same clearence as the wifes Jeep Patriot, and God help ya in the sand or muddy ruts.
Yet they jacked the bed sides to shoulder level so it looks like it has clearence to spare. I can't even get under the thing to change the oil on a creeper.
Just goofy. Must be a Milage/aerodynamics thing.

Have you considered a Jeep and a trailer for hauling stuff?
The new 4dr Wranglers get decent milage, go anywhere, and Used Dog would have plenty of room. Just tossing ideas at ya.

Good luck!

Stay safe!
Dingeryote


----------



## Gologit (Sep 7, 2010)

slowp said:


> How do you like them?
> 
> Do you get good clearance on the newer ones? We have a lot of :censored:
> "driveable" water bars and little washouts to negotiate if you get off the main tourist roads. My Subaru hits too.



As you well know, since you made me take the Tacoma when we went to look at the hazard tree, they do pretty good. Bearing in mind that you made me drive up a road that was probably off limits to any thing but a D-6 (as in "it's okay Bob, just hit that big slide area with some extra speed and you'll probably get across without rolling over") It still had the paper plates and you figured that was a good way to baptize it. You were right. Don't let that go to your head.

I take mine to the woods and I don't baby it. I can go places the bigger pickups can't go and get turned around in tighter spots. I've used it as a skidder more than once and if you're careful they'll move a hell of a big log. I can carry everything I need for a day's work, and more. After a year and a half and twenty thousand hard miles I have had zero mechanical issues with it and it's never let me down. No squeaks, rattles, or leaks, and everything still works like the day I bought it.

Will it carry the load a full sized pickup will? No.
Will it tow a huge trailer in mountainous country? Not very well.
Will it out-accelerate a Maserati? Nope.
It will , if properly maintained, probably last you a long time. Maybe forever.
It will, over time, save you big bucks in gas, tire, licensing, and insurance costs over the money spent on a full size.
It will, when you go on your weekly WalMarche raid to Centralia, be able to be parked in the narrow slots without the aid of a tugboat and two flagmen.
Get a good canopy for it with the side windows that flip up. You won't be sorry.

A lot of the fallers I know have changed over to the smaller pickups with Toyota the most commonly seen. We used to stand around and BS about how powerful our f-250s and Dodge diesels were...now we stand around and compare notes on gas mileage and and how much we've saved on incidentals.

When you get the new Toyota why not drive it down here to break it in? I have some really good roads we could take the new off of it with.


----------



## forestryworks (Sep 7, 2010)

My grandpa once told me, back when I got my first pickup truck at 16, "the cheapest vehicle you will ever own is the one you own right now."


----------



## slowp (Sep 7, 2010)

Yes, after I posted this I remembered the Toyota Road Test area. It still has not been repaired or maintained. The road that is. 

I do not just need a woods truck. There's a million of those around here. I'm
also looking for something to drive in the winter. I ski. I live 45 minutes from the ski area, which is located at the top of a mountain pass. That road can be gnarly, but usually the highway crew has it in good shape. If you have a 4 wheel drive, you don't have to put on chains unless they require them on 4x4s, and well, then you don't want to be on the road. 

I do not want to pull a trailer around in the woods. Unless there's logging going on, that is a risky thing to do. The only way the majority of forest roads get maintained which is brushing, blading and fixing is to have logging going on. There's not much of that taking place. There's not many places to turn around. 

The Subaru is the best rig for snow, but it is too low to negotiate the waterbars that are in the roads that access the secret huckleberry patches. I have bashed my way in on those roads in the past, but it seems like it is only time until something gives. I can't haul very much firewood in it either. 

I'd still use the little Chevy for most road trips. It gets fantastic mileage. Hmmmmm, must be the driver? 

This is a picture of one of the few well maintained roads. Now, imagine it with alder grown in on each side making a tunnel, rocks in the travelway, and a few sidecast problems. See the dropoff? That's why I don't like trailers in the woods.


----------



## s13rymos (Sep 7, 2010)

I know its not a yota but i can depend on my frontier to get me anywhere in the woods i wanna.. i load my gear in the cab, saws in the bed, and away i go


----------



## 371groundie (Sep 7, 2010)

ive had good luck with rangers. im on my second. nothing wrong with the first one when i got rid of it, just wanted the extended cab and got a deal. i dont trust automatic transmissions. so ive always gotten the 5spd. kept up on general maintenance and theyve treated me well. i started with a ranger in college so it would fit in the parking spots on campus, took it to the woods as a forester, then a logger, now an arborist. 

my first truck was a reg. cab with a cap. it was nice to lock the cap but with the regular cab everything was in the bed. my extra clothes were always cold in the winter, and smelled like saw gas. now i have the extended cab with a rack and toolbox. saws go in the box, ropes and gear go in the extd cab with the guns, fishing poles, etc. i can still haul another person and some wood in the back. 

thats my two cents on little trucks, but i know two guys who have tacomas in the woods everyday and have had 0 problems.


----------



## hammerlogging (Sep 7, 2010)

Gologit said:


> I take mine to the woods and I don't baby it. I can go places the bigger pickups can't go and get turned around in tighter spots. I've used it as a skidder more than once and if you're careful they'll move a hell of a big log. I can carry everything I need for a day's work, and more. After a year and a half and twenty thousand hard miles I have had zero mechanical issues with it and it's never let me down. No squeaks, rattles, or leaks, and everything still works like the day I bought it.
> 
> Will it carry the load a full sized pickup will? No.
> Will it tow a huge trailer in mountainous country? Not very well.
> ...



Agreed. Same. Except mine has 354,000 and still is fine, not pretty, but runs good same mileage as ever, runs 80 on the highway and on rutted skid roads to get to the falling spot, then back, every day. Turns around and doesn't get stuck. Keep an eye out for the models with locking differentials, a real bonus.


----------



## Eccentric (Sep 9, 2010)

slowp said:


> How do you like them? Or would you get something better? I'm thinking after scraping and hitting the bottom of my little 2 wheel drive Chevy yesterday. I was on one of the *better *roads, looking for huckleberries. No damage that I know of to the Chevy.
> 
> Do you get good clearance on the newer ones? We have a lot of :censored:
> "driveable" water bars and little washouts to negotiate if you get off the main tourist roads. My Subaru hits too.
> ...





2dogs said:


> I don't think slowp is looking for a rock crawler or a project. She is looking for a 4x4 with better ground clearence than her present 4x2. A Toyota trucj should be practical for several years.
> 
> For info I drive a Dodge. Mizz p I think you would be better served by having a 3/4 ton diesel regular cab pickup truck. Dog will like it much better and there is more room inside for the shotgun and machete, standard tools for the zombie apocalypse.



I agree with 2Dogs. My favorite woods rides are my 4WD 1986 F250 diesel pickup, and my 1974 International Harvester Scout. Both rigs are great on the rough 'well maintained roads' and in the snow, and have gotten me and my family into and out of places much much worse. Tough as nails, and have plenty of cargo carrying capacity for all the tools need to survive the zombie apocalypse. Plenty of room fer dogs too.

As for something more modern.........................I'd suggest a 90s Ford Bronco (can't remember what year they were discontinued), F150, or F250 4WD. I'm partial to diesels (so that means F250 in that case), but the Ford gassers (4.9L six, 5.0L or 5.8L V8s) are realy good too. The 460 (7.5L) and the 6.8L V10 are gas hogs, and not what you need methinks. The 460 was discontinued in the early '90s, and the V10 was available until the late '90s anyway...

For something new, I'd say a well equiped (for off road) Jeep Wranger (such as the Rubicon), Ford Ranger (FX4 package is great for off road use), Toyota Tundra (get the optional locker), or maybe the Dodge Power Wagon (which has all kinds of off road capable goodies such as locking front and rear difs) would fit the bill. 


If you work on your own stuff (or have someone to do it fer ya).....then I suggest you keep the Subaru for 'everyday' and scare up an old Scout. Long Live the Old Iron!!!


----------



## slowp (Sep 9, 2010)

FORD BRONCOS? :censored: No way. I've driven one of those clunkers. For several years. A tin can on wheels that is prone to do 360s on ice. A white knuckle lemon....I'd rather chain up my 2 wheel drive Chevy....as you can see, I have strong ant-Bronco emotions. 

I putted up and down a road in my first Subaru, that the Bronco had to be chained up to get down safely. I hated the Bronco. Siping the snow tires helped a little, but not much. I'd still go sliding sideways down one hill. I'd tell any passengers what might happen, but not to worry as there were tall snow berms on either side, no traffic and we'd slide gently to the bottom.  
Nope, a two wheel drive works better than a Bronco of the 90s for me.


----------



## Gologit (Sep 9, 2010)

slowp said:


> FORD BRONCOS? :censored: No way. I've driven one of those clunkers. For several years. A tin can on wheels that is prone to do 360s on ice. A white knuckle lemon....I'd rather chain up my 2 wheel drive Chevy....as you can see, I have strong ant-Bronco emotions.
> 
> I putted up and down a road in my first Subaru, that the Bronco had to be chained up to get down safely. I hated the Bronco. Siping the snow tires helped a little, but not much. I'd still go sliding sideways down one hill. I'd tell any passengers what might happen, but not to worry as there were tall snow berms on either side, no traffic and we'd slide gently to the bottom.
> Nope, a two wheel drive works better than a Bronco of the 90s for me.



Okaaaaaayy...I guess we can cross Broncos off the list.


----------



## Greystoke (Sep 9, 2010)

Gologit said:


> As you well know, since you made me take the Tacoma when we went to look at the hazard tree, they do pretty good. Bearing in mind that you made me drive up a road that was probably off limits to any thing but a D-6 (as in "it's okay Bob, just hit that big slide area with some extra speed and you'll probably get across without rolling over") It still had the paper plates and you figured that was a good way to baptize it. You were right. Don't let that go to your head.
> 
> I take mine to the woods and I don't baby it. I can go places the bigger pickups can't go and get turned around in tighter spots. I've used it as a skidder more than once and if you're careful they'll move a hell of a big log. I can carry everything I need for a day's work, and more. After a year and a half and twenty thousand hard miles I have had zero mechanical issues with it and it's never let me down. No squeaks, rattles, or leaks, and everything still works like the day I bought it.
> 
> ...



Excellent description of a yota Bob! (can't rep ya yet). I swore I would never own a "Rice Grinder" til I moved to Southeast Alaska and was replacing Brand new Toyo Tires and Diesel fuel for my 97 f350 crewcab powerstroke, like they were going out of style. My Dad talked me into buying a 84 toyota extended cab 4wd from him, and it was hands down the best fallers rig I had ever experienced. The shot rock roads up there are hell on tires, and truck bodies, and that little yota shined. Every time I would pass one of the other fallers in their "big trucks", to and from work, I would "smile and wave"

Here is my 85 Toyota, Tarzan tree rig that I trust to get me to tree jobs 75 mph down the highway, or to take to the mountains huntin, where I can chain up all four, pull er into low range, and climb a mountain, pushin snow with the bumper!






I had to add a leaf to the rear springs cuz of the weight that I haul in it.







Buy a yota (I am partial to the older ones) and thank us later


----------



## Eccentric (Sep 9, 2010)

slowp said:


> FORD BRONCOS? :censored: No way. I've driven one of those clunkers. For several years. A tin can on wheels that is prone to do 360s on ice. A white knuckle lemon....I'd rather chain up my 2 wheel drive Chevy....as you can see, I have strong ant-Bronco emotions.
> 
> I putted up and down a road in my first Subaru, that the Bronco had to be chained up to get down safely. I hated the Bronco. Siping the snow tires helped a little, but not much. I'd still go sliding sideways down one hill. I'd tell any passengers what might happen, but not to worry as there were tall snow berms on either side, no traffic and we'd slide gently to the bottom.
> Nope, a two wheel drive works better than a Bronco of the 90s for me.



OK...................I _did_ mention _other_ vehicles _after_ the Bronco in my post. F150's, F250's, and such. You must have lapsed into a nasty Bronco flashback and blacked out.........Crikey...I didn't mean to bring back such tramatic memories...


----------



## Eccentric (Sep 9, 2010)

tarzanstree said:


> Excellent description of a yota Bob! (can't rep ya yet). I swore I would never own a "Rice Grinder" til I moved to Southeast Alaska and was replacing Brand new Toyo Tires and Diesel fuel for my 97 f350 crewcab powerstroke, like they were going out of style. My Dad talked me into buying a 84 toyota extended cab 4wd from him, and it was hands down the best fallers rig I had ever experienced. The shot rock roads up there are hell on tires, and truck bodies, and that little yota shined. Every time I would pass one of the other fallers in their "big trucks", to and from work, I would "smile and wave"
> 
> Here is my 85 Toyota, Tarzan tree rig that I trust to get me to tree jobs 75 mph down the highway, or to take to the mountains huntin, where I can chain up all four, pull er into low range, and climb a mountain, pushin snow with the bumper!
> 
> ...



Nice rig. My Southern Oregon arborist buddy swears by his 1983 Yota. The 1979-1985 Toyotas are great rigs. The later ones are still good......but I am partial to the solid front axle style that was discontinued for 1986 (except in Australia, India, and on the African continent....where they continued for years). I'm not a fan of the IFS setup for an off road vehicle, even though the '99 Ranger I had was surprisingly capable. I'd LOVE to be able to get a new example of the solid-axle diesel Toyotas that the Ausies and Africans enjoyed for years....


----------



## Blakesmaster (Sep 9, 2010)

tarzanstree said:


> Excellent description of a yota Bob! (can't rep ya yet). I swore I would never own a "Rice Grinder" til I moved to Southeast Alaska and was replacing Brand new Toyo Tires and Diesel fuel for my 97 f350 crewcab powerstroke, like they were going out of style. My Dad talked me into buying a 84 toyota extended cab 4wd from him, and it was hands down the best fallers rig I had ever experienced. The shot rock roads up there are hell on tires, and truck bodies, and that little yota shined. Every time I would pass one of the other fallers in their "big trucks", to and from work, I would "smile and wave"
> 
> Here is my 85 Toyota, Tarzan tree rig that I trust to get me to tree jobs 75 mph down the highway, or to take to the mountains huntin, where I can chain up all four, pull er into low range, and climb a mountain, pushin snow with the bumper!
> 
> ...



Very nice yota, Tarzan. That roller style bed is what I want to build for my 4Runner.


----------



## Greystoke (Sep 9, 2010)

Blakesmaster said:


> Very nice yota, Tarzan. That roller style bed is what I want to build for my 4Runner.



I copied that off of a buddies manufactured one, and even used his welder to build it...it rules!


----------



## Blakesmaster (Sep 9, 2010)

tarzanstree said:


> I copied that off of a buddies manufactured one, and even used his welder to build it...it rules!



Cool. Mine needs to be a toolbox style that locks because I often drive around topless but the concept is there. Late model yota's are really the best. I think slowp was asking about a newer stuff though. Maybe we can convince her.


----------



## slowp (Sep 9, 2010)

Eccentric said:


> OK...................I _did_ mention _other_ vehicles _after_ the Bronco in my post. F150's, F250's, and such. You must have lapsed into a nasty Bronco flashback and blacked out.........Crikey...I didn't mean to bring back such tramatic memories...



Traumatized forever when it comes to those heaps. Memories of chaining up the back tires with frozen fingers, then calling out on the CB, then listening, then heading slowly, down a steep grade hoping nobody was on the way up, hands are now sweaty, I'm telling my toes to relax (skiing trick) and soon pushing in the clutch and thinking "Let 'er buck" and freewheeling on down the grade. Freewheeling because it kept the back end in the back. 

Traumatized after listening to the talk about a Patty Sandwich as I'm coming down another hill, there is a shovel walking down in front, and a loaded log truck on the way behind, and we are on "The Beaver Slide".

I think I have blocked out other Bronco memories. Oh, there's the story of alarmed looking passengers. We headed out on a sub zero day. After getting into the woods, one said (and these are higher ups) , "I'm sure you have a shovel and chains." And I got to reply, "Yes, that's the good news. The bad news is that the window won't roll down when it is this cold." There was a permanently installed screen (headache screen) between the backseat and the back area where the gear was kept. 

That's enough. I have good Subaru memories. Some good Ford pickup memories and even some good Chevy Silverado memories in the making.


----------



## hammerlogging (Sep 10, 2010)

I was having a look to see what might be around the other day and came across this gem. Rare, low miles, asking too much even if it is rare, maybe so ugly you need to look at it through only one eye to see the beauty, but a special gem no doubt. In Washington:

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.j...ssion=&max_price=&cardist=2226&standard=false


----------



## slowp (Sep 10, 2010)

hammerlogging said:


> I was having a look to see what might be around the other day and came across this gem. Rare, low miles, asking too much even if it is rare, maybe so ugly you need to look at it through only one eye to see the beauty, but a special gem no doubt. In Washington:



It shouts, "Yuppie Scum beware!". Is that extra cab room natural? Or was it added on?

This is at the edge of the ultra secret huckleberry patch. One of the few I can get to with only one scrape the bottom waterbar on the main road, and a little hike in. To get to this pond, you have to go through some thick brush and blowdowns.


----------



## joecool85 (Sep 10, 2010)

371groundie said:


> ive had good luck with rangers. im on my second. nothing wrong with the first one when i got rid of it, just wanted the extended cab and got a deal. i dont trust automatic transmissions. so ive always gotten the 5spd. kept up on general maintenance and theyve treated me well. i started with a ranger in college so it would fit in the parking spots on campus, took it to the woods as a forester, then a logger, now an arborist.
> 
> my first truck was a reg. cab with a cap. it was nice to lock the cap but with the regular cab everything was in the bed. my extra clothes were always cold in the winter, and smelled like saw gas. now i have the extended cab with a rack and toolbox. saws go in the box, ropes and gear go in the extd cab with the guns, fishing poles, etc. i can still haul another person and some wood in the back.
> 
> thats my two cents on little trucks, but i know two guys who have tacomas in the woods everyday and have had 0 problems.



Another vote for 4x4 Rangers. Mine will go just about anywhere and came stock with 31" tall tires (245/75/16). The 3.0 V6 is a good way to go with the 5spd. I get 22mpg back and forth to work and still have enough torque to pull lots of wood around.


----------



## purdyite (Sep 10, 2010)

My '97 w/ the 6 cyl is awesome. But get good, big, high-flotation tires--just replaced 'em on mine last week and I am sold on wide, aggressive-tread design. We go trout fishing/camping, I pull a trailer loaded with firewood and the kitchen, and I have a camper shell to secure everything else. Getting around in the woods is great. It's 4WD, of course...


----------



## joecool85 (Sep 10, 2010)

purdyite said:


> My '97 w/ the 6 cyl is awesome. But get good, big, high-flotation tires--just replaced 'em on mine last week and I am sold on wide, aggressive-tread design. We go trout fishing/camping, I pull a trailer loaded with firewood and the kitchen, and I have a camper shell to secure everything else. Getting around in the woods is great. It's 4WD, of course...



'yota or ranger?


----------



## LarryTheCableGuy (Sep 10, 2010)

purdyite said:


> ...But get good, big, high-flotation tires--just replaced 'em on mine last week and I am sold on wide, aggressive-tread design...


'cept in the snow.

.


----------



## Eccentric (Sep 10, 2010)

joecool85 said:


> Another vote for 4x4 Rangers. Mine will go just about anywhere and came stock with 31" tall tires (245/75/16). The 3.0 V6 is a good way to go with the 5spd. I get 22mpg back and forth to work and still have enough torque to pull lots of wood around.



Yep. That 3.0L V6 is the engine I had in my '99 Ranger 4WD. Had exactly the same experience with it that you related. Unfortunatley, the 3.0L was discontinued a year or two ago, so the only Ranger engine choices now are the 2.3L DOHC four (no relation to the older SOHC 2.3L four which was a decent engine) and the 4.0L V6. The 4.0L has great power but is somewhat of a gas hog. I have the 2.3L DOHC engine in my 2003 Mazda B2300 2WD (basicaly a Ranger with slightly different bodywork and badging). It's not a good pickup engine IME. The shortest gears you can get it are 3.73's. It is more of a 'sports car' engine, in that you have to wind the pee outa it and abuse the clutch to get it moving. It doesn't get along with the 3.73's, and would probably be much happier with 4.10's. Probably would get better MPG with 4.10's too...

It gets about 3-5 MPG better than my '99 Ranger 4WD with the 3.0L V6 did with bigger tires (but the same gearing, and on the same commute) *at best*. Doesn't pull hills well at all either. I'd MUCH rather have that 3.0L V6 than the DOHC four. Not happy with it at all. Probably will be getting a new Ranger sometime in the next year or so, and will be forced to go with the 4.0L as I WILL NOT get another 2.3L DOHC four. It has been a constant source of problems and irritation. It is actualy damn quick if you 'run it like you stole it', but that doesn't do much for longevity...

Toyota dropped their 3.0L midsize V6 too, and offers similar choices as the Ranger (2.5L four and 4.0L six). A couple of years ago, they also made the Tacoma into a 'mid size' pickup that's as big as the T100 they sold for a while. That's a shame, as a true Toyota mini truck (with the old 22R four) was a great rig. Shame on you Toyota.....:censored:


----------



## 2dogs (Sep 10, 2010)

LarryTheCableGuy said:


> 'cept in the snow.
> 
> .



or the mud


----------



## Eccentric (Sep 10, 2010)

*I'm a believer in the Pizza Cutter School of Off Road tires...*



LarryTheCableGuy said:


> 'cept in the snow.
> 
> .





2dogs said:


> or the mud



Or on ice...



Especialy with a lightweight rig like we're talking about here. Too little ground pressure on the tread. That's what makes rigs (like P's traumatic Bronco) slide down hills on the ice too. Uless you're running on sand or DEEP snow, then I'd go with more narrow tires. Has always worked great for me, both with lightweight rigs and the heavy bruisers. 

If I had wide meats on my 1986 F250HD 4WD Diesel SC pickup, then it'd STILL be down in a ravine in the Lassen NF............and I'd probably be in a pine box. For about a decade, a number of good friends and I would get together in the Lassen NF, just bordering the Ishi Wildneress Area for a yearly 'hunting' trip. Started off as a pig hunting trip the first year (and one of the Lads got a pig), but it morphed into a 'howl at the moon', wheeling (Pelegrin Jeep Trail), shooting, and firewood cutting trip. Rained about every other year on average. Hotter than heck the rest of the time. 

Anywho.....on one particularly rainy year, I took the big diesel instead of the Scout, as I intended to load up on windfall firewood (took about 1/2 cord of Oak out...crammed in with the camping gear and coolers). It was raining cats and dogs on the way in, and the volcanic soil there developes a layer of axle grease in short order when it rains. It gives MEGA traction within an hour of the rain *stopping*......but that didn't help me here. That 6700 pound or so rig (verified on a scale) and I skated around on every sidehill. One off-camber hillclimb (shortly before camp) in paticular saw me doing the four wheel shuffle towards a steep, deep ravine. Luckily, I was able to pour the coals on, and the narrow LT235/85R16 BFG AT's I was running dug down to dry ground and stopped me before I went for a ride. If I'd had wide meats I'd have been screwed...


----------



## Rounder (Sep 10, 2010)

Most of the guys I saw with run Tacomas. Good trucks, especially the older models with the 22-R four cylinder. They're a good choice for a forester or faller, long as you don't have to haul diesel - Sam


----------



## Gologit (Sep 10, 2010)

mtsamloggit said:


> ...... long as you don't have to haul diesel - Sam



Sam, that's the beauty of running a small pickup. It cuts down on the "can-ya" requests.

You've probably worked for outfits that, since your day ends earlier than most, want you to stop in town and load up a few things to bring out in the morning. The siderod could leave a little early and do it but they never seem to...it cuts down on their beer drinking time. If you're like me you don't mind unless it starts getting out of hand

Like, "can ya stop in town and pick up a couple of barrels of hydraulic oil, three pallets of chokers, a bull line, some oil filters, a box of gloves, a coil of air line, 2 cases of anti freeze, and some snoose for the Catskinner that's camping out til the warrant on him expires?"

Nope. 


With a Toyota, even as good as they are, sometimes you just have to draw the limit. I'd get the snoose for the Catskinner, though. No point making the man suffer.


----------



## Rounder (Sep 10, 2010)

Gologit said:


> Sam, that's the beauty of running a small pickup. It cuts down on the "can-ya" requests.
> 
> You've probably worked for outfits that, since your day ends earlier than most, want you to stop in town and load up a few things to bring out in the morning. The siderod could leave a little early and do it but they never seem to...it cuts down on their beer drinking time. If you're like me you don't mind unless it starts getting out of hand
> 
> ...





Lol, yep. Can't wait to get rid of my full size Dodge- the next one'll be a toyota. Aside from the work related errands, somebody always wants you and the big truck to help them move. Not exactly what I want to do on the weekend. Pretty hard to stuff a couch in a Toy! - Sam


----------



## Burvol (Sep 10, 2010)

hammerlogging said:


> Agreed. Same. Except mine has 354,000 and still is fine, not pretty, but runs good same mileage as ever, runs 80 on the highway and on rutted skid roads to get to the falling spot, then back, every day. Turns around and doesn't get stuck. Keep an eye out for the models with locking differentials, a real bonus.



Absolutly a bonus.


----------



## Burvol (Sep 10, 2010)

Pretty much my idea on the Yota. I fall timber, not drag blocks and rigging, feed cows with hay, or work on equipment and haul iron. Compact, easy to turn around, and remember: 3rd Gear Low Range= Unstoppable (My Toyota buddy Nick's old saying and it has merit). 

Fondest memoir of a Toyota fest was on the Lower River RD Vancouver, WA wheeling and atv complex. It has since been gone for almost a decade, but it was a place that when the Columbia would lower due to the tide and upstream Bonneville water, a sea of fresh mud and mayhem would appear. There was a long road out there with a super-straight for dragracing as well. Seems like in 2000 Ice House had emearged as the new "Cheap Beer" around those parts with a blue can in almost every Toyota. The "New Look" Fords had just come out and we were starting to see a bunch of them get lifted and fitted with big treads. Make a long story short, one fall day I remember 4 or 5 Fords and a Dodge getting so burried that we had 5 Toyotas and 2 Jeeps pulling on them. One Ford was so buried that mud was all but a foot from windows. The guy crawled out his window and called for a D5 with line to pull everyone out. For the rest of the evening we spun loops around the stuck full sizes, drinking Ice House and telling a few guys how much a Toyota cost, who was selling one, ect. The one guy swore he was selling his Ford after he had it detailed. Stories like this aren't even common in the NW, it's just household knowledge what truck will not be beat on the trail.


----------



## hammerlogging (Sep 10, 2010)

slowp said:


> It shouts, "Yuppie Scum beware!". Is that extra cab room natural? Or was it added on?



Its a legit add-on some company outfitted a number of them for 4 years or so, stretched the frame and added the backseat. I can't vouch for whether or not it was a good idea, but if it was 2500 miles closer and 1500 dollars cheaper I'd be tempted, love that interior space.


----------



## slowp (Sep 10, 2010)

A hooktender told me that Toyota Pickups will go anywhere, and proceeded to drive, successfully over a slide in the road. :jawdrop:


----------



## PB (Sep 11, 2010)

Hands down the best stock pickup I have ever taken into the woods on logging roads, farm roads etc. was my Ranger. I had a 2003 until I wrecked it and replaced it with a 2004. Long story why i got rid of it, and it wasn't because of reliability, but I wish I still had it. Three sand bags in the bed, studded tires and I could go anywhere in the snow. Maine doesn't like to plow both lanes of the highway and I never had any problems. 

The ground clearance on mine was higher than my 08 F150 and turned a hell of a lot better. The 4.0L was tough on gas, around 22mpg (not terrible) highway but with the 4.10 gears it would pull a decent amount if ever need be. Around here the newer ones come with smaller tires and the 3.0L but back in PA they still come with the 4.0L and 255/70-16 tires. Just my .02 but I REALLY loved my Rangers.


----------



## joecool85 (Sep 12, 2010)

Eccentric said:


> Yep. That 3.0L V6 is the engine I had in my '99 Ranger 4WD. Had exactly the same experience with it that you related. Unfortunatley, the 3.0L was discontinued a year or two ago, so the only Ranger engine choices now are the 2.3L DOHC four (no relation to the older SOHC 2.3L four which was a decent engine) and the 4.0L V6. The 4.0L has great power but is somewhat of a gas hog. I have the 2.3L DOHC engine in my 2003 Mazda B2300 2WD (basicaly a Ranger with slightly different bodywork and badging). It's not a good pickup engine IME. The shortest gears you can get it are 3.73's. It is more of a 'sports car' engine, in that you have to wind the pee outa it and abuse the clutch to get it moving. It doesn't get along with the 3.73's, and would probably be much happier with 4.10's. Probably would get better MPG with 4.10's too...
> 
> It gets about 3-5 MPG better than my '99 Ranger 4WD with the 3.0L V6 did with bigger tires (but the same gearing, and on the same commute) *at best*. Doesn't pull hills well at all either. I'd MUCH rather have that 3.0L V6 than the DOHC four. Not happy with it at all. Probably will be getting a new Ranger sometime in the next year or so, and will be forced to go with the 4.0L as I WILL NOT get another 2.3L DOHC four. It has been a constant source of problems and irritation. It is actualy damn quick if you 'run it like you stole it', but that doesn't do much for longevity...
> 
> Toyota dropped their 3.0L midsize V6 too, and offers similar choices as the Ranger (2.5L four and 4.0L six). A couple of years ago, they also made the Tacoma into a 'mid size' pickup that's as big as the T100 they sold for a while. That's a shame, as a true Toyota mini truck (with the old 22R four) was a great rig. Shame on you Toyota.....:censored:



I have 4.10s in my rig (with the 3.0 like I said) and periodically wish for 4.30s or 4.56s. That said, I think I'd get ticked about highway driving the few times I do it. 4.10 is about the right gear for that truck. For the I4 I'd def go with 4.56 though, they love to rev.


----------



## Eccentric (Sep 12, 2010)

joecool85 said:


> I have 4.10s in my rig (with the 3.0 like I said) and periodically wish for 4.30s or 4.56s. That said, I think I'd get ticked about highway driving the few times I do it. 4.10 is about the right gear for that truck. For the I4 I'd def go with 4.56 though, they love to rev.



Yep. With that high-revvin' I4, Ford's crazy not to offer anything shorter than 3.73's (at least in the 2WD pickups). My 2WD B2300 is hardly ever in fifth, even with little 225/75/15's. In the Toyotas, the standard ratio with the 2.5L is something like 3.42/1! That kinda thinking makes no sense when using OD manuals. I believe 4.30-ish gears are available with the Toyota at least. I can remember when the old Toyota's came stock with 4.56's and four or five speeds and the 20R/22R I4's......and the 20R/22R was a MUCH more torquey engine than this current Ford I4. The four speed would have been iritating as heck on the freeway though. 

My Dad and Grandpa had '71 and '73 Datsun 1600 pickups with four speeds, so I can remember the buzzing four days. That's not as iritating as my '67 Scout with a 196 I4 and 4.27's is on the freeway though. Those gears, a non-OD transmission, and a 4K *REDLINE* engine (that's *much* happier below 3K) don't make for fun freeway driving. My friend's flatfender Jeeps are even more freeway unfriendly. A worn out, bellcrank filled steering system plus 5.38's and a flathead four are not a good combo for freeway miles. Gotta be in a different mindset when driving those kinds of rigs.


----------



## purdyite (Sep 13, 2010)

> 'yota or ranger?



Sorry...It's a 'yota Tacoma.


----------



## headleyj (Sep 14, 2010)

Some Taco info: 
95-00's were recalled and some bought back due to frame rust. Make sure you check into that if you buy one in this year range.

01-04's were recalled also due to frame rust -Toyota is swapping the frames out.

I am not bashing Toyota. I've had an 88 taco, 03 taco, 03 Tundra, 04 Tundra, 04 4runner and an 08 Tundra so I really like 'em.

Just want people to be smart buyers and have the knowledge if they didn't already. btw the 01-04 Taco bodystyle is my favorite


----------



## Eccentric (Sep 14, 2010)

headleyj said:


> Some Taco info:
> 95-00's were recalled and some bought back due to frame rust. Make sure you check into that if you buy one in this year range.
> 
> 01-04's were recalled also due to frame rust -Toyota is swapping the frames out.
> ...



Thanks for the Taco info! Are the 01-04 Tacos the last of the 'small' pickups? I like those too, and would gladly get one to replace my B2300 Mazduh. I'd rather get a newer truck because I need it to survive a long commute..................but I'm totaly turned off by Toyota's decission to make the Taco a 'mid-size' pickup. They ruined it by making it so damn big IMO...


----------



## joecool85 (Sep 14, 2010)

Eccentric said:


> Are the 01-04 Tacos the last of the 'small' pickups?



No, the 2011 Ford Ranger is the last "small pickup." It's currently the only mass produced compact pickup available in the US and it might get the axe after next year. Although 2008 was the last year they offered my favorite configuration (3.0 V6, 4x4, 5spd). Now you can only get the torqueless 2.3 DOHC I4 or the gas-hog 4.0 V6 that gets small-V8 mileage.


----------



## headleyj (Sep 14, 2010)

Eccentric said:


> Thanks for the Taco info! Are the 01-04 Tacos the last of the 'small' pickups? I like those too, and would gladly get one to replace my B2300 Mazduh. I'd rather get a newer truck because I need it to survive a long commute..................but I'm totaly turned off by Toyota's decission to make the Taco a 'mid-size' pickup. They ruined it by making it so damn big IMO...



It's the last of the small pickups that Toyota made yes. The 05+ Taco's are bigger and drastically different.

Also the 04 Tacoma's were the first year for their fly by wire and minor issues were reported from what I was on www.TTORA.com


----------



## Eccentric (Sep 14, 2010)

joecool85 said:


> No, the 2011 Ford Ranger is the last "small pickup." It's currently the only mass produced compact pickup available in the US and it might get the axe after next year. Although 2008 was the last year they offered my favorite configuration (3.0 V6, 4x4, 5spd). Now you can only get the torqueless 2.3 DOHC I4 or the gas-hog 4.0 V6 that gets small-V8 mileage.



Sorry. I meant the last of the *Toyota* small pickups. BTW-Nissan still makes a 'small' pickup with their Frontier as well (or is it gone for 2011?). Not crazy about the looks of 'em. Also had a jerk of a boss (who just retired thank God) who drove one. Can't get the jerk-boss/Frontier connection outa my head. Stupid I know... 

I'm aware of the current Rangers. I was talkin' about them (and their current engine/axle ratio choices) a few posts ago. I mentioned that the 3.0V6/4X4/5spd was my favorite combination (and lamented the elimination of the 3.0L in the Ranger lineup) as well. Wish I still had my '99 3.0L/4X4/5spd Ranger. What year is yours? I currently have the torqueless DOHC I4 in my 2003 Mazdog B2300...

http://www.arboristsite.com/showpost.php?p=2441189&postcount=33




headleyj said:


> It's the last of the small pickups that Toyota made yes. The 05+ Taco's are bigger and drastically different.
> 
> Also the 04 Tacoma's were the first year for their fly by wire and minor issues were reported from what I was on www.TTORA.com



Thanks again. More good info. That means I wouldn't want newer than a 2003. Rats. That's just too old for me, unless the thing has sat in some bloke's garage for the last 7 years with 20K on the clock. I was against FBW throttle systems long before any of the media hoopla. Give me a dang linkage or throttle cable anyday...


----------



## PasoRoblesJimmy (Sep 14, 2010)

There are more Toyota Land Cruisers used worldwide than any other jeep type vehicle. The old design FJ-40s are awesome for off-road use.


----------



## Eccentric (Sep 14, 2010)

PasoRoblesJimmy said:


> There are more Toyota Land Cruisers used worldwide than any other jeep type vehicle. The old design FJ-40s are awesome for off-road use.



True..........but they haven't sold a "real" Land Cruiser here for some time. The best models (the diesels) never made to us. Seen a few 'grey market' BJ70s and such.......but that's it. Wish we could get the Toyota models they sold and still sell in Africa, India, and Australia. The "Crocodile Hunter" diesel pickup comes to mind.

Got several friends that have or had old 'Cruisers. Theres two FJ60s and one 1982 FJ40 still in 'the extended family'. Great rigs, but not without their faults (like everything else....including my Binders). I stood that that FJ40 on its butt-end once...


----------



## joecool85 (Sep 14, 2010)

Eccentric said:


> I'm aware of the current Rangers. I was talkin' about them (and their current engine/axle ratio choices) a few posts ago. I mentioned that the 3.0V6/4X4/5spd was my favorite combination (and lamented the elimination of the 3.0L in the Ranger lineup) as well. Wish I still had my '99 3.0L/4X4/5spd Ranger. What year is yours? I currently have the torqueless DOHC I4 in my 2003 Mazdog B2300...:



That's what I get for not paying attention to who is posting that I'm replying to lol. Mine is a 2000. If I was you I'd look for a 2008 Ranger with the 3.0 and grab it while you can get them with low miles.


----------



## PasoRoblesJimmy (Sep 14, 2010)

Eccentric said:


> True..........but they haven't sold a "real" Land Cruiser here for some time. The best models (the diesels) never made to us. Seen a few 'grey market' BJ70s and such.......but that's it. Wish we could get the Toyota models they sold and still sell in Africa, India, and Australia. The "Crocodile Hunter" diesel pickup comes to mind.
> 
> Got several friends that have or had old 'Cruisers. Theres two FJ60s and one 1982 FJ40 still in 'the extended family'. Great rigs, but not without their faults (like everything else....including my Binders). I stood that that FJ40 on its butt-end once...



Old school Toyota HiLux Diesel Pickup - Amazingly Tough!!!! Can't kill it!!!!!

BBC Top Gear- killing a Toyota pt 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wg4bBPlWzT8:hmm3grin2orange:


----------



## bobsreturn (Sep 15, 2010)

*tough trucks*

hi down under. we have mitsubishi 4wds 1 ton , have an 07 3.5lt v6 petrol . will climb a tree in first gear on idle , handy cause its steep where i gets my logs . just change into 4wd with out having to clutch is handy when you are caught . can you get them in the states and what do they call them? cheers Bob


----------



## PasoRoblesJimmy (Sep 15, 2010)

Eccentric said:


> True..........but they haven't sold a "real" Land Cruiser here for some time. The best models (the diesels) never made to us. Seen a few 'grey market' BJ70s and such.......but that's it. Wish we could get the Toyota models they sold and still sell in Africa, India, and Australia. The "Crocodile Hunter" diesel pickup comes to mind.
> 
> Got several friends that have or had old 'Cruisers. Theres two FJ60s and one 1982 FJ40 still in 'the extended family'. Great rigs, but not without their faults (like everything else....including my Binders). I stood that that FJ40 on its butt-end once...



The new yuppie-style Land Cruisers are waaaaaay too much like SUVs. 

Short wheelbases can be unsafe and unstable on paved highways. I saw an FJ-40 suddenly do a 360 degree rollover for no reason on a straight stretch of highway. Driver scalped. Passenger had a shattered shoulder. 

My son's 1978 FJ-40 has incredible low-speed torque. The inline 6 can easily climb up a steep, nearly vertical incline.

Toyota Land Cruiser Forum
http://www.toyotafjcruiserforums.com/old-school-fj-40/


----------



## Eccentric (Sep 15, 2010)

joecool85 said:


> That's what I get for not paying attention to who is posting that I'm replying to lol. Mine is a 2000. If I was you I'd look for a 2008 Ranger with the 3.0 and grab it while you can get them with low miles.



No worries. I'm gonna try to find a low-mileage 2008 with a 3.0L like you suggested. Wish me luck!



PasoRoblesJimmy said:


> Old school Toyota HiLux Diesel Pickup - Amazingly Tough!!!! Can't kill it!!!!!
> 
> BBC Top Gear- killing a Toyota pt 1
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wg4bBPlWzT8:hmm3grin2orange:



That's some crazy stuff. Saw that episode as well as the later one where they put the Toyota on top of a building (and imploded it). Still didn't kill the little pickup. They said it was 13 years old (making it around a '93 if that episode was shot in 2006). The last year we could get the solid front axle in the states was '85. There were diesels available until that time as well. I don't know if the diesels we could get were the same as that 2.4L in the pickup they abused on Top Gear.



bobsreturn said:


> hi down under. we have mitsubishi 4wds 1 ton , have an 07 3.5lt v6 petrol . will climb a tree in first gear on idle , handy cause its steep where i gets my logs . just change into 4wd with out having to clutch is handy when you are caught . can you get them in the states and what do they call them? cheers Bob



We can't get those Mitsubishi's here. You blokes down under could/can get all kinds of fantastic stuff that we can't. The Department of Transportation and the Enviromental Protection Agency could merge and rename themselves the Fun Police....:censored:



PasoRoblesJimmy said:


> The new yuppie-style Land Cruisers are waaaaaay too much like SUVs.
> 
> Short wheelbases can be unsafe and unstable on paved highways. I saw an FJ-40 suddenly do a 360 degree rollover for no reason on a straight stretch of highway. Driver scalped. Passenger had a shattered shoulder.
> 
> ...



I'm no stranger to SWB rigs. My first 'street legal' vehicle was a '66 Bronco (92" WB) that I got when I was 16. I have a few International Harvester Scouts (100" WB) and I've driven my friend's FJ40's. The Flatfender Jeeps are even shorter. As long as folks use their heads, then there isn't an issue with 'em. Heck, the Jeep Wrangler series is still available here, and is both SWB and solid axle. 


The manufacturers and the government seem to think that the American public is too stupid and too soft to have vehicles like the Early Bronco, Scout, and solid axle Toyota mini trucks anymore. It is true that we have a good load of idiots that can't think for themselves.............except when it's time to sue someone else for their own stupidity. The Wrangler is the last of the 'old' type available here......and I'm peeved at Chrysler for dumping the 4.0L I6 for the 3.7L V6 car engine. That's another rant though...


----------



## hammerlogging (Sep 15, 2010)

Eccentric said:


> The last year we could get the solid front axle in the states was '85. There were diesels available until that time as well. I don't know if the diesels we could get were the same as that 2.4L in the pickup they abused on Top Gear.:




Same engine but the one I drove (factory diesel) could just hold 60 before it sounded like it was revved to high, that said, not a highway driver, so I regretfully had to pass it up. The turbo isn't really any different.

I think I keep piling miles on my T100 in hopes that a diesel will finally be offered in a Tacoma, I'd hate to replace my truck and a year later they finally release one in the U.S.


----------



## slowp (Sep 15, 2010)

You guys are talking in a foreign language now. I just want a pickup, that is decent to drive, can go to town, or on a long trip, get me into the secret huckleberry patches, and won't swill a lot of gasoline. Oh, it also needs to be a nice color, have room for The Used Dog, and be able to haul some firewood or skis or other people's dogs. Air conditioning and cruise control are must haves. 

No carpet, if possible.


----------



## havenodog (Sep 15, 2010)

Have a 89 yota with 210,000 very hard miles on it, that truk has been overloaded more times than not with 2 cubes of brick, hundreds of blocks through the years. and wood, lots of wood. It has never let me set. those 22re motors are the standard of the industry. It gets around in my back yard with no problem and is the go to vehicle in any kind of bad weather. Plowed through 2+ feet of snow to get my son medicine years ago. Never skipped a beat. Had it since 1991 and it will go with me to my grave. Best Da&* truck in the world. Bury me in my toyota truck. Thats all.


----------



## Big_Al (Sep 15, 2010)

i have an 06 ranger 4x4, 5spd with the 4l engine and my woodcutting buddy has an 03 ranger 4x4,5spd with 3l. He is constantly wishing he had bought the 4l engine, the fuel mileage between the rigs is the same and the 4l has way more power. He is miserable driving it when its loaded down or towing anything. Both have plenty of clearance and do well in the snow. Usually use my F250 for the woodcutting trips though, with an 8x16 trailer.


----------



## Wildman1024 (Sep 16, 2010)

slowp said:


> You guys are talking in a foreign language now. I just want a pickup, that is decent to drive, can go to town, or on a long trip, get me into the secret huckleberry patches, and won't swill a lot of gasoline. Oh, it also needs to be a nice color, have room for The Used Dog, and be able to haul some firewood or skis or other people's dogs. Air conditioning and cruise control are must haves.
> 
> No carpet, if possible.



I have a 2009 Tacoma TRD Sport. I love everything about it except the fact its standard. i have driven standard since my 1st vehicle and love it except for this. The EPA and all the electronic stuff ruined it. You get used to it but its not fun or a pleasure anymore...its liek work driving.

Anyways besides for being standard the truck is awesome. The 4.0l makes awesome power. I put 1 quad in the bed and tow the trailer with another quad and you do not even know they are there. The truck is comfortable, handles and stops well and the 4x4 is toyota quality. Also has great ground clearance and the bed from the factory is composite like material that wont dent or rust out or scrape all up like a truck w/o a liner. Also has a 120v outlet in the bed so you can run like a radio or stuff out where there is no power. The tie downs in the bed are great and can be moved all around to.

I'm the type of person who drives a vehicle for 2 years and is ready to get rid of it cause i want something new. When i can afford to get rid of this soon im gonna get the same truck again but only automatic. now that tells ya something. I've been a jeep fan all my life to but i love this truck.

The next one is gonna get the factory super charger though. This truck is really quick already...imagine another 65hp 

Less the 100 miles old in these pics!


----------



## joecool85 (Sep 16, 2010)

Big_Al said:


> i have an 06 ranger 4x4, 5spd with the 4l engine and my woodcutting buddy has an 03 ranger 4x4,5spd with 3l. He is constantly wishing he had bought the 4l engine, the fuel mileage between the rigs is the same and the 4l has way more power.



Same mpg? What are you guys getting for mileage? I get 21mpg average in my 3.0 equipped 4x4 supercab...never seen a 4x4 4.0 do that myself. Also, tell your buddy to put the gears to her, the 3.0 needs 4.10 gears or lower to do any real work. My truck came with them because of either the Off Road package or the factory Tow Package (I have both, not sure which gave me the gears since I bought the truck used).


----------



## PB (Sep 16, 2010)

joecool85 said:


> Same mpg? What are you guys getting for mileage? I get 21mpg average in my 3.0 equipped 4x4 supercab...never seen a 4x4 4.0 do that myself. Also, tell your buddy to put the gears to her, the 3.0 needs 4.10 gears or lower to do any real work. My truck came with them because of either the Off Road package or the factory Tow Package (I have both, not sure which gave me the gears since I bought the truck used).



I got 22 highway with my 4.0 and 4:10 gears. Never got less than 21 on the highway unless I was running studded snow tires.


----------



## Ambull (Sep 16, 2010)

I cruise my trails with this thing: not a Toyota but a Suzuki Carry Mini Truck. I can get almost half a cord unsplit in the bed.


----------



## Eccentric (Sep 16, 2010)

SlowP]You guys are talking in a foreign language now. I just want a pickup said:


> I cruise my trails with this thing: not a Toyota but a Suzuki Carry Mini Truck. I can get almost half a cord unsplit in the bed.



That's cool. Never seen one of those before. Closest thing I've seen in the US (Ca at least) is the Rhino/Ranger/Pilot side-by-side ATV based rigs and the JD Gator type vehicles. That looks a bit bigger and more robust than either of those types of rigs, and about the size of an old FlatFender Jeep. I like the solid rear axle. Most of the SBS rigs are IRS now. What transmission and engine options are available with those? Wonder if we can get those in Ca. I see a license bracket setup on the front..............are those street legal in your state?


----------



## banshee67 (Sep 16, 2010)

Wildman1024 said:


> the bed from the factory is composite like material that wont dent or rust out or scrape all up like a truck w/o a liner.



and we all know how great toyota trucks track record for rust is 
:greenchainsaw:

and to all those guys claiming 20+ mpg highway in ANY truck.. does this mean you are driving 55mph on flat ground in overdrive? around here youll get run off the road going under 70-


----------



## Wildman1024 (Sep 16, 2010)

banshee67 said:


> and we all know how great toyota trucks track record for rust is
> :greenchainsaw:



Yea but it seems every time they step up to the plate and take care of the issues. I cant say that for other companies

I get 20mpg in my 2009. 6th gear highway cruse set at 73ish


----------



## banshee67 (Sep 16, 2010)

so if the OP is lookin for a used taco, i think the main thing to consider would be which years were effected with the rust issue, and weather or not the previous owner has brought it back for its "recall" (a new frame, correct?) 
and then at that point, do you want a truck thats been totally taken apart and put back together to have the frame replaced? 
not bashing toyota, but i think its odd no one has brought this up yet in a thread about tacos


----------



## banshee67 (Sep 16, 2010)

PB said:


> Never got less than 21 on the highway unless I was running studded snow tires.



.. or there was a hill


----------



## joecool85 (Sep 16, 2010)

PB said:


> I got 22 highway with my 4.0 and 4:10 gears. Never got less than 21 on the highway unless I was running studded snow tires.



4x4? Most guys with the 4.0 I know are getting 15-16mpg average, 18mpg highway. I get 22 highway and 20-21 normal driving. I expect that the lack of difference between the two there is due to the 4.10 gears and 31" tall tires. The worst I've ever gotten was stop and go traffic for almost a full tank in the winter and I got 17mpg.


----------



## joecool85 (Sep 16, 2010)

banshee67 said:


> and we all know how great toyota trucks track record for rust is
> :greenchainsaw:
> 
> and to all those guys claiming 20+ mpg highway in ANY truck.. does this mean you are driving 55mph on flat ground in overdrive? around here youll get run off the road going under 70-



My normal driving is between 45 and 60mph, I consider "highway" the interstate, 65mph speed limit and I go 70mph in 5th gear.


----------



## PB (Sep 16, 2010)

joecool85 said:


> 4x4? Most guys with the 4.0 I know are getting 15-16mpg average, 18mpg highway. I get 22 highway and 20-21 normal driving. I expect that the lack of difference between the two there is due to the 4.10 gears and 31" tall tires. The worst I've ever gotten was stop and go traffic for almost a full tank in the winter and I got 17mpg.



4x4 automatic, extended cab with 255/70-16 tires. Your friends must be heavy with the gas pedal. I have mileage reports for the entire time I had my last Ranger, about 77,000 miles worth. If I averaged every tank I would guess it would be around 19mpg with all driving. I pulled a 5x8 _*loaded*_ UHaul from Maine to PA and still got 17mpg the entire way.


----------



## PB (Sep 16, 2010)

joecool85 said:


> My normal driving is between 45 and 60mph, I consider "highway" the interstate, 65mph speed limit and I go 70mph in 5th gear.



I consider highway anything that doesn't have a stop light.


----------



## banshee67 (Sep 16, 2010)

PB said:


> I consider highway anything that doesn't have a stop light.



in that case, youd get about 10mpg on some of the "highways" here,.lol


----------



## Ambull (Sep 16, 2010)

Eccentric said:


> That's cool. Never seen one of those before. Closest thing I've seen in the US (Ca at least) is the Rhino/Ranger/Pilot side-by-side ATV based rigs and the JD Gator type vehicles. That looks a bit bigger and more robust than either of those types of rigs, and about the size of an old FlatFender Jeep. I like the solid rear axle. Most of the SBS rigs are IRS now. What transmission and engine options are available with those? Wonder if we can get those in Ca. I see a license bracket setup on the front..............are those street legal in your state?



Mini Trucks are a separate class of vehicle in Japan. They come in various configurations, and all the Japanese manufacturers make a version (Toyotas are marketed under Daihatsu for mini trucks).

Anyways, there are many gray market importers of these trucks, mostly in the 4X4 version. Then you can add lift kits, camo, big tires, etc. Suzuki models are the easiest to modify into serious off road vehicles. I bought this truck for $4000, which is about the going rate for a moderately used 4X4. I have about $2000 into it. This one does not have AC or power steering, but many do. It does have heat, windshield washer, driver's airbag, nice stereo (I installed) shift on the fly 4WD, Hi-Lo. Almost all of them are 5 speed manual tranny. The engines are all regulated at 660cc, which with stock tires will get them up to 60 mph or so. The suzuki has a nice 3 cylinder fuel injection system, and the thing runs awesome.

There is a whole forum on mini trucks, http://www.minitrucktalk.com/

You can def get one in Ca, but good luck getting it street legal. Some states allow them on the road. Out on my farm I slapped a orange triangle on the back, and I don't bring it into town.


----------



## Big_Al (Sep 16, 2010)

My ranger with the 4L has 4;10 gears and gets 17 town and 22 highway which is identical to my friends 3L with 3;73 gears. Both are supercab 4x4.


----------



## joecool85 (Sep 17, 2010)

PB said:


> 4x4 automatic, extended cab with 255/70-16 tires. Your friends must be heavy with the gas pedal. I have mileage reports for the entire time I had my last Ranger, about 77,000 miles worth. If I averaged every tank I would guess it would be around 19mpg with all driving. I pulled a 5x8 _*loaded*_ UHaul from Maine to PA and still got 17mpg the entire way.



It's not just my friends. All the guys on therangerstation.com as well. The 4.0 guys are always complaining about cruddy mileage. The 4.0 4x4 autos normally get in the ballpark of 15-16 mpg, heck, even the 3.0 4x4 autos only get 17mpg most of the time. I think *you* are the oddity here. Although in this case it is a good thing.


----------



## PB (Sep 17, 2010)

joecool85 said:


> It's not just my friends. All the guys on therangerstation.com as well. The 4.0 guys are always complaining about cruddy mileage. The 4.0 4x4 autos normally get in the ballpark of 15-16 mpg, heck, even the 3.0 4x4 autos only get 17mpg most of the time. I think *you* are the oddity here. Although in this case it is a good thing.



That's good for me I guess, but I find it hard to believe that people are getting below 19mpg. I have owned 2, 4.0 Rangers a 2003 that I wrecked and my 2004. Both were identical setups and got similar mileage. Granted I don't do much or any city driving but I always got above EPA sticker mileage. For what the 4.0 is pulling around I would expect to get 25mpg highway from a small truck. Why can't small trucks (any brand) get much better mileage than a full size? For comparison, my 4.6L F150 gets 19.5mpg highway. The truck is a lot bigger, weighs more, and gets similar mileage to any compact pickup with a V6. Hopefully the 2012 Ranger does better. The current platform is done at the end of 2011. I hope they keep all the good stuff and improve on everything else. The current Ranger is just too small for what I need but I LOVE that truck.


----------



## joecool85 (Sep 17, 2010)

PB said:


> That's good for me I guess, but I find it hard to believe that people are getting below 19mpg. I have owned 2, 4.0 Rangers a 2003 that I wrecked and my 2004. Both were identical setups and got similar mileage. Granted I don't do much or any city driving but I always got above EPA sticker mileage. For what the 4.0 is pulling around I would expect to get 25mpg highway from a small truck. Why can't small trucks (any brand) get much better mileage than a full size? For comparison, my 4.6L F150 gets 19.5mpg highway. The truck is a lot bigger, weighs more, and gets similar mileage to any compact pickup with a V6. Hopefully the 2012 Ranger does better. The current platform is done at the end of 2011. I hope they keep all the good stuff and improve on everything else. The current Ranger is just too small for what I need but I LOVE that truck.



We might not get a 2012 Ranger, but if we do it will probably be the Euro one like they are doing with the Fiesta. From what I've heard the difference is that instead of a 2.5 and 3.0 V6 diesel offerings we will probably have a 2.0 I4 turbo ecoboost (gas) or something.


----------



## PB (Sep 17, 2010)

joecool85 said:


> We might not get a 2012 Ranger, but if we do it will probably be the Euro one like they are doing with the Fiesta. From what I've heard the difference is that instead of a 2.5 and 3.0 V6 diesel offerings we will probably have a 2.0 I4 turbo ecoboost (gas) or something.



The current euro version is still based on the USA made platform, that platform is going away. A 2012 is going to be a ground up new model and speculation is it will be bigger and have the F100 badge. Of course, like everything with new models, this is all conjecture. 

The euro version and Mazda B50 (I think that is right) have much more up to date styling but still ride on the same chassis as the US ranger and explorer. The 2011 Explorer is already off that chassis and went to the Taurus platform, which sucks, and that to me is an indicator of a ground up develop for any new small truck.


----------



## Big_Al (Sep 17, 2010)

I used to look on rangerstation quite a bit but now usually go to ford-trucks.com for my ford info. The 3L is usually called the 3 slow, thought to be reliable but underpowered. Most prefer the 4L, same mileage with more power. I can't speak to the auto tranny rangers, never had one. I do know my 5 spd will routinely run low 20's at highway speeds, mid teens cruising the woods. Not great but beats the heck out of my F250 with 460.


----------



## Eccentric (Sep 17, 2010)

Ambull said:


> Mini Trucks are a separate class of vehicle in Japan. They come in various configurations, and all the Japanese manufacturers make a version (Toyotas are marketed under Daihatsu for mini trucks).
> 
> Anyways, there are many gray market importers of these trucks, mostly in the 4X4 version. Then you can add lift kits, camo, big tires, etc. Suzuki models are the easiest to modify into serious off road vehicles. I bought this truck for $4000, which is about the going rate for a moderately used 4X4. I have about $2000 into it. This one does not have AC or power steering, but many do. It does have heat, windshield washer, driver's airbag, nice stereo (I installed) shift on the fly 4WD, Hi-Lo. Almost all of them are 5 speed manual tranny. The engines are all regulated at 660cc, which with stock tires will get them up to 60 mph or so. The suzuki has a nice 3 cylinder fuel injection system, and the thing runs awesome.
> 
> ...



Thanks a bunch for the mini-truck info!


----------



## banshee67 (Sep 17, 2010)

so cmon.. whos gona be the first with a toyota taco to admit they had to bring it in to have the whole frame swapped?
im still surprised there is no talk of this in a thread discussing tacos VS rangers!
when lookin for a used car id sure wana know if it was one of the ones id have to bring in and have them totally disassemble it for a new frame!! not exactly an oil change and tire rotation!


----------



## joecool85 (Sep 18, 2010)

Big_Al said:


> I used to look on rangerstation quite a bit but now usually go to ford-trucks.com for my ford info. The 3L is usually called the 3 slow, thought to be reliable but underpowered. Most prefer the 4L, same mileage with more power. I can't speak to the auto tranny rangers, never had one. I do know my 5 spd will routinely run low 20's at highway speeds, mid teens cruising the woods. Not great but beats the heck out of my F250 with 460.



Yeah, it is called the 3.slow, although with 4.10 gears and a 5spd it isn't that bad, quite spunky actually and plenty of torque for a small truck, at least in the 155hp/190tq circa 2000 iteration. I've had over 1,500lbs in the bed and it does alright even on hill starts. And you are right about their reliability. Can't beat them on that, about the same as the old 1.9 CVH motors in the 2nd gen mid 90's escorts.


----------



## headleyj (Sep 20, 2010)

banshee67 said:


> so if the OP is lookin for a used taco, i think the main thing to consider would be which years were effected with the rust issue, and weather or not the previous owner has brought it back for its "recall" (a new frame, correct?)
> and then at that point, do you want a truck thats been totally taken apart and put back together to have the frame replaced?
> not bashing toyota, *but i think its odd no one has brought this up yet* in a thread about tacos



I did - check pg 4


----------



## epicklein22 (Sep 20, 2010)

Yota's are the best truck for the woods! Nimble and tough! 270k on this one. Would still be on the road if not for EPA testing here in NEO.

If anyone wants a Yota, my buddies will have a few for sale soon......


----------



## bobsreturn (Sep 21, 2010)

looks like a one owner . last one got the optional disolve a body . they do that here but dont replace the chassis . looks like you are getting your moneys worths


----------



## fishercat (Sep 21, 2010)

*here are some facts.*



banshee67 said:


> so cmon.. whos gona be the first with a toyota taco to admit they had to bring it in to have the whole frame swapped?
> im still surprised there is no talk of this in a thread discussing tacos VS rangers!
> when lookin for a used car id sure wana know if it was one of the ones id have to bring in and have them totally disassemble it for a new frame!! not exactly an oil change and tire rotation!



Early tacomas are under recall.Toyota gives you blue book and a half.they are reimbursing for accessories as well.late model tacomas and early tundras get new frames installed.at Toyota's expense.this is in rust belt regions.
no one I know is complaining.

I would never buy anything but a Toyota truck.I have three.an 85,88,and a 97.I would kill someone over any of them.

Most people I know have a Toyota or are getting one finally.look at the 95 and up t100 with the 3.4 V6.they are bulletproof.


----------



## fishercat (Sep 21, 2010)

*one more thing.*

If they replace your frame,they extend your warranty.no matter the mileage.


----------



## bdeboer (Sep 21, 2010)

fishercat said:


> Early tacomas are under recall.Toyota gives you blue book and a half.they are reimbursing for accessories as well.late model tacomas and early tundras get new frames installed.at Toyota's expense.this is in rust belt regions.
> no one I know is complaining.
> 
> .



On the 2001-2004 Tacomas they are only replacing the frame if they fail the rust test. The others are getting a rust coating by Toyota. They also will not extend the rust warranty if the coating is not done by October 31, 2010. At least that is letter we got on my wifes 2004 Tacoma. It also think they are handling different states and regions differently.


----------



## fishercat (Sep 22, 2010)

*it is regional.*



bdeboer said:


> On the 2001-2004 Tacomas they are only replacing the frame if they fail the rust test. The others are getting a rust coating by Toyota. They also will not extend the rust warranty if the coating is not done by October 31, 2010. At least that is letter we got on my wifes 2004 Tacoma. It also think they are handling different states and regions differently.



I have a couple friends with frames that are fine on early tacomas.another friend just forund out he;s getting a new frame on his early Tundra.He is very happy.

Everyone I know that owns a Tundra says it's the best truck they have ever owned and the will never buy anything else.I feel the same about my T100 but there are on;y so many out there. Kinda weird that a clean used T100 gets more money than a clean used early Tundra.


----------



## PasoRoblesJimmy (Sep 22, 2010)

Ever ridden in a WW2 Half-track or an M1 Abrams tank?

They are the ultimate off-road vehicles.


----------



## joecool85 (Sep 23, 2010)

PasoRoblesJimmy said:


> Ever ridden in a WW2 Half-track or an M1 Abrams tank?
> 
> They are the ultimate off-road vehicles.



Unless you have to fit through anything narrow.


----------



## banshee67 (Sep 23, 2010)

joecool85 said:


> Unless you have to fit through anything narrow.



just run it over! whatever you cant run over, use a saw , or the gun on the tank, right?


----------



## joecool85 (Sep 24, 2010)

banshee67 said:


> just run it over! whatever you cant run over, use a saw , or the gun on the tank, right?



Yeah, Mom didn't need that barn anyway.


----------



## bdeboer (Sep 24, 2010)

fishercat said:


> I have a couple friends with frames that are fine on early tacomas.another friend just forund out he;s getting a new frame on his early Tundra.He is very happy.
> 
> Everyone I know that owns a Tundra says it's the best truck they have ever owned and the will never buy anything else.I feel the same about my T100 but there are on;y so many out there. Kinda weird that a clean used T100 gets more money than a clean used early Tundra.



I mean't to add her 2004 with 90K+ and 6 Ohio winters had no problem. She took it in for the rust coating, and they gave her a loaner for 2 days.


----------



## R Walter (Sep 27, 2010)

In the oil patch all you ever see are 3/4 and 1-ton fords, chevys and dodges because anything else gets beat to all hell!


----------



## CHEVYTOWN13 (Sep 29, 2010)

slowp said:


> A hooktender told me that Toyota Pickups will go anywhere, and proceeded to drive, successfully over a slide in the road. :jawdrop:



I've seen some Taco's do some gnarly stuff:jawdrop: Particularly at Moab.

And without a doubt, get the locker.

If you ever get the chance, in the Southern Sierra, you can take Sherman Pass. Awesome trail.


----------



## PasoRoblesJimmy (Sep 29, 2010)

joecool85 said:


> Unless you have to fit through anything narrow.



Who needs roads? If a large oak tree gets in the way of an M1 Abrams, just run over it.


----------



## PasoRoblesJimmy (Sep 29, 2010)

CHEVYTOWN13 said:


> I've seen some Taco's do some gnarly stuff:jawdrop: Particularly at Moab.
> 
> And without a doubt, get the locker.
> 
> If you ever get the chance, in the Southern Sierra, you can take Sherman Pass. Awesome trail.



I've seen 1960s Datsun 2wd pickups tackle some really gnarly trails.


----------



## CHEVYTOWN13 (Sep 29, 2010)

Jimmy, remember our GTG and the trucks that were coming up that trail near our cutting area. No 2WD would have made that trail

But I have seen them in some gnarly stuff. Will never forget the time this Chevy 2WD was having a hard time getting up these rocks. He put it in reverse and we heard him yell out..."let's do this:censored:!"






































































:jawdrop:


































Damn if he didn't re-invent the bucking bronco! He made it though and with no damage No doubt, when it doubt, throttle out!


----------



## madhatte (Sep 29, 2010)

I realize that this is the exception rather than the rule, but I once watched a kid in a tiny little Ford Ranger float over a mud bog with several full-sized rigs (including my old '60 Willys) stuck in up to their hoods as obstacles to drift around. Dude was an impressive driver. 

That said, I pretty much killed a 1/2 ton Chevy working here over the last couple of years, including a thrown rod and extensive body damage, through nothing more than just getting around in the woods during all seasons, and, of course, turning around on poorly-maintained trails. Now I'm driving a 1-T Dodge, and it's holding up much better. The short wheelbase helps a lot, but the better clearance and flat bed are the real winners. Poor Chevy took most of its damage to the bottom of the bed.


----------



## slowp (Nov 23, 2010)

UNBELIEVABLE!!

I have the Seattle news on and they just showed cars that were abandoned last night because the cars could not make it up a hill. One was

A TACOMA!

I thought Tacomas could make it anywhere? I did not see any Subarus.


----------



## Adkpk (Nov 23, 2010)

Did it show a picture of the driver?:greenchainsaw:


----------



## banshee67 (Nov 23, 2010)

maybe it didnt have some sort of limited slip (or whatever toyota calls it) ? its usually an option you have to pay extra for(not sure about toyotas)
its surprising how useless a 4x4 is with only 2 wheels turning


----------



## madhatte (Nov 23, 2010)

banshee67 said:


> its surprising how useless a 4x4 is with only 2 wheels turning



Too true! Chevy 1/2 tons today with their IFS are REALLY easy to get stuck because you can't jam enough junk under the free wheel to keep it from just bouncing it out of the way. Give me a straight axle any day!


----------



## joecool85 (Nov 23, 2010)

banshee67 said:


> maybe it didnt have some sort of limited slip (or whatever toyota calls it) ? its usually an option you have to pay extra for(not sure about toyotas)
> its surprising how useless a 4x4 is with only 2 wheels turning



I dunno, while I agree that a locker or at least limited slip on one or both axles is a HUGE improvement, 4x4 with standard open diffs are still pretty darn impressive. At least my Ranger is.


----------



## banshee67 (Nov 23, 2010)

joecool85 said:


> I dunno, while I agree that a locker or at least limited slip on one or both axles is a HUGE improvement, 4x4 with standard open diffs are still pretty darn impressive. At least my Ranger is.



thats cause its a ford! 
fords are just better.. just like stihls

yes, im being serious  opcorn:


----------



## hammerlogging (Nov 23, 2010)

I cut with a diehard Husky guy yesterday and he seemed dissappointed that I didn't give a damn about brand loyalty. My appreciation for his 390 made him almost have to consider the value in my hopped up 660. I wonder if he cried himself to sleep last night.


----------



## Greystoke (Nov 24, 2010)

hammerlogging said:


> I cut with a diehard Husky guy yesterday and he seemed dissappointed that I didn't give a damn about brand loyalty. My appreciation for his 390 made him almost have to consider the value in my hopped up 660. I wonder if he cried himself to sleep last night.



I never have been loyal to a brand neither...if it is a good machine, it has my appreciation. I have about equal hours on Husky and Stihl and Stihl can't make up my mind which I like best. I have not ran huskies since the days of 394's so I would like a crack at a few of the newer ones.


----------



## slowp (Nov 24, 2010)

Got my sweet 5 passenger snowmobile home. Old Snuffy flew up my road without a slip or slide. Ahhh, mobile again. He has to go back in because shipments of things like catalytic converters are running late. 

If I don't have a Tacoma, a Subaru is the next best thing.


----------



## pwoller (Nov 24, 2010)

hammerlogging said:


> I cut with a diehard Husky guy yesterday and he seemed dissappointed that I didn't give a damn about brand loyalty. My appreciation for his 390 made him almost have to consider the value in my hopped up 660. I wonder if he cried himself to sleep last night.



Probably not cause a hopped up 390 will cut faster then the 660, he's probably getting it modded as we speak.


----------



## fishercat (Nov 24, 2010)

*hmmmmmmmmm.............*



banshee67 said:


> thats cause its a ford!
> fords are just better.. just like stihls
> 
> yes, im being serious  opcorn:



people have been know to be dead serious while 3 sheets to the wind or stoned out of their gord.


----------

