Duratec 2.3 vs 22-re

250k on a Tacoma is "proceed with caution" miles. Not even a whole lot of caution.

For 2RZ vs. Duratec...the 2RZ has a few more modern features. Aluminum is lighter but dissipates heat, which can help reduce component temperatures but slows heat-up to operating temperature. Aluminum heads and blocks are also bulkier which could make maintenance more difficult. It's probably not worth worrying about block & head materials too much.

In reply to GameboyRMH:

FYI: Duratec is all aluminum too. Cosworth also made parts for it.

In reply to GameboyRMH:

Not to get too involved into this thread... But two questions- what do you mean by "a few more modern features", and are you trying to say that a cast iron block is better than aluminum???

In the Ranger, the duratec is the first application of the brand new motor, so I'm curious what parts of the older Toyota motor would be considered to be "more modern".

And I've never seen anyone suggest that aluminum blocks are not a good idea like that. interesting. Not sure how their "bulkiness" makes maintenence more difficult- outside of oil changes, what maintenece does one do to an aluminum block that differs so much from an iron block?

twolittlebroncos wrote: Thanks for all the help. We (the wife and I) have elevated the extended cab feature from "want" to "need" which is changing the dynamics of my vehicle search. We like the Toyota ext. cab better than the Ford. Also, the Duratec Ranger ext. cabs are almost non-existent in my area.

I know you are looking for a 4 cyl truck- but a comment on the Ranger extended cab- the hand full of them we've had (1 3.0 and 2 4.0s), the cab is 4 door- with the rear part opening toward the front. This gave awesome access to the rear of the truck. It was pretty darned nice to have the rear area that open.

By "more modern features" I meant the balance-shaft-free design and variable intake, but then the Duratec is available with VVT now that I check so it would be fair to call it a wash.

Aluminum and iron blocks have their ups and downs, which one is better really depends on what you need. Aluminum blocks are bulkier and the engine compartments housing them aren't, so there will be less room for your hands.

For my purposes, it sounds like the engines are about the same.

Additional doors to the extended cab would be nice, but I don't think they were ever offered on the Duratec Rangers which I'm already not finding to be plentiful in the extended cab configuration.

Planning to check out the Taco tomorrow and will go from there.

Thanks for all the good info.

GameboyRMH wrote: By "more modern features" I meant the balance-shaft-free design and variable intake, but then the Duratec is available with VVT now that I check so it would be fair to call it a wash. Aluminum and iron blocks have their ups and downs, which one is better really depends on what you need. Aluminum blocks are bulkier and the engine compartments housing them aren't, so there will be less room for your hands.

balance shaft free = modern???? So my '59 Alfa is modern? That, I would have never put into the 'modern' bin.

Same for the variable intake- that's been around for ages, and is even part of the Duratec in the Ranger. There are a lot of little details that I would call modern- all of which added up to a PZEV capable motor in the duratec- but those are boring details to most people.

And I still don't see aluminum blocks being bulkier. Particularly in the engine bay of a small pick up. but if you want to be a iron sales man, well...

twolittlebroncos wrote: For my purposes, it sounds like the engines are about the same. Additional doors to the extended cab would be nice, but I don't think they were ever offered on the Duratec Rangers which I'm already not finding to be plentiful in the extended cab configuration. Planning to check out the Taco tomorrow and will go from there. Thanks for all the good info.

I've never seen a late 4cyl ranger that's extended cab. IF it had that, it would be 4 door, since it was already part of the other cars. But I don't think you can get a 4 cyl with an extended cab in a Ranger. Heck, I've only even seen SWB trucks as Duratecs- so no ex-cab and short bed.

I'll bring this thread back up with the conclusion.

I was all lined up and ready to go on a regular cab Ranger 2.3, but family circumstances intervened. I am getting a Tacoma instead. My research conclusion was that the Ranger 2.3 (after 2001) was the way to go for a regular cab. When you start trying to get kids and carseats involved, the Tacoma xtracab seems to be the best bet (in my price range anyway).

Unfortunately there's serious Toyota tax on Tacomas. I found a '99 2wd 2.4 (2rz) 5-speed xtracab SR5 with 245k miles that I'm picking up for a little over $3k. I feel like the price is still high for the miles and condition, but I'm not willing to wait for a better deal at this point.

http://fayar.craigslist.org/cto/3413512636.html

A bit more bucks, but a hundred thousand less miles.