# Who's Making The Best Half Ton Truck???



## rahtreelimbs

Who is???


----------



## NYH1

Dodge in my opinion!


----------



## sawinredneck

Toyota? Nissan? Sorry, ALL of the domestic half tons have left a bitter taste in my mouth of late!


----------



## begleytree

dodge? try keeping a tranny in it. bought a new '00 ram 360cu in. after many visits and 9K miles, they bought it back from me. ran great, when it ran great. very few times though.


andy, you're not supposed to taste them there! those little jap trucks, now they like that sort of thing. 

-Ralph


----------



## Husky137

Right about now I would say they all have real shortcomings either in durabilty, usefullness or build quality. Seem slike the ones w/ good powertrains have shoddy interiors or rust prone bodies.


----------



## ropensaddle

sawinredneck said:


> Toyota? Nissan? Sorry, ALL of the domestic half tons have left a bitter taste in my mouth of late!


 Me too look out when they make one tons


----------



## NYH1

begleytree said:


> dodge? try keeping a tranny in it. bought a new '00 ram 360cu in. after many visits and 9K miles, they bought it back from me. ran great, when it ran great. very few times though.
> 
> 
> andy, you're not supposed to taste them there! those little jap trucks, now they like that sort of thing.
> 
> -Ralph


Well my family and I have had major problems with the Ford cars, trucks and SUVs we've had. Ford is all we ever drove. Around 1999 we started switching to Chrysler products, Chrysler, Jeep and Dodge mostly 4x4's. We haven't had anywhere near the problems with our Chrysler's like we had with our Fords. 

When I buy something I look back on the manufactures I've had and go from there. I have never had any problems at all with my Glock pistols. When I want another pistol I automatically look at Glock because I've had great luck with them. I do the same with vehicles. Until I have trouble with my Chrysler products, I'm sticking with them. Just me though!

2000 Jeep Cherokee Sport 4x4- no problems
2002 Dodge Dakota SLT V8 4x4- needed tires.
2003 Dodge Durango SLT V8 4x4- wiper motor.
2005 Dodge Durango SLT Hemi all wheel drive- tranny line is leaking. They tighten it up and it stopped but they're going to replace it anyway's.
2007 Dodge Ram 1500 SLT Quad Cab 4x4- just got it last week!

My parents have had just as many Chrysler's with the same results. We've had good luck with GM products as well. We just haven't bought any lately. Fords........we won't be buying anymore any time soon.


----------



## ben14826

IMO, Chevy/GMC and Toyota are making the best half ton trucks right now. Ford and Dodge are making good trucks but it seems like they have more quirks and faults than the previously mentioned. Every manufacturer has their strong points, and each of them have their weak points. I like Chevy trucks, but there's a lot of things about Chevy trucks that I don't like. The same can be said for all of the manufacturers. Unless of course you've let yourself become brand biased, in which case who cares what you say anyway.:biggrinbounce2:


----------



## 12guns

NYH1 said:


> Well my family and I have had major problems with the Ford cars, trucks and SUVs we've had. Ford is all we ever drove. Around 1999 we started switching to Chrysler products, Chrysler, Jeep and Dodge mostly 4x4's. We haven't had anywhere near the problems with our Chrysler's like we had with our Fords.
> 
> When I buy something I look back on the manufactures I've had and go from there. I have never had any problems at all with my Glock pistols. When I want another pistol I automatically look at Glock because I've had great luck with them. I do the same with vehicles. Until I have trouble with my Chrysler products, I'm sticking with them. Just me though!
> 
> 2000 Jeep Cherokee Sport 4x4- no problems
> 2002 Dodge Dakota SLT V8 4x4- needed tires.
> 2003 Dodge Durango SLT V8 4x4- wiper motor.
> 2005 Dodge Durango SLT Hemi all wheel drive- tranny line is leaking. They tighten it up and it stopped but they're going to replace it anyway's.
> 2007 Dodge Ram 1500 SLT Quad Cab 4x4- just got it last week!
> 
> My parents have had just as many Chrysler's with the same results. We've had good luck with GM products as well. We just haven't bought any lately. Fords........we won't be buying anymore any time soon.




What are you smoking??? I want some! Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep are the most repair prone vehicles out there. I suppose if you always trade up before they get 80k miles on them, you might be ok, but in my mind, they are disposable vehicles. May as well throw them away at 80-100k miles. Ask some repair shops, they will give you a good idea of what brands need more repairs. 
Toyota and GMC/Chevy are about all I would buy. Although I like the looks of Ford/.


----------



## OTG BOSTON

*Die Hard 'YODA fan*

Can't say enough about my Tundra. If I were to buy a 3/4 or 1 ton It'd be a Chevy


----------



## NYH1

12guns said:


> What are you smoking??? I want some! Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep are the most repair prone vehicles out there. I suppose if you always trade up before they get 80k miles on them, you might be ok, but in my mind, they are disposable vehicles. May as well throw them away at 80-100k miles. Ask some repair shops, they will give you a good idea of what brands need more repairs.
> Toyota and GMC/Chevy are about all I would buy. Although I like the looks of Ford/.


Not smoking anything. It's funny you mention Toyota and GMC/Chevy. My good friend is a ASE mechanic. He's worked at Chrysler, GM and Toyota dealers. Guess what, he was just as busy when he worked at Toyota and GMC/Chevy dealers as he was when he worked at Chrysler dealers. Warranty and service work included. :biggrinbounce2:

And yeah you're right I lease my vehicles so I don't put that many miles on them. The last Ford I leased was a 2000 Ford Ranger XLT 4x4 4.0L engine. After a year and a half and 10,000 miles I traded it in early and had to pay out the last six month of the lease to get my 2002 Dodge Dakota. I had so many problem with that Ranger it wasn't funny. Needed a drive shaft after a week. Needed the transfer case rebuilt because it leaked (BorgWaner to be expected). Paint was flaking off! It was all covered under warranty, but I'd had enough!

Drive what ever you want. I'll take a Chrysler or GM!


----------



## ASD

ford


----------



## beowulf343

Toyota is looking pretty good these days.


----------



## Peacock

As a tech in the field who has worked on them all......



I would take the new GMT900 trucks over any of the rest. Hands down.


----------



## begleytree

beowulf343 said:


> Toyota is looking pretty good these days.



compared to what?
Toyota recalled more vehicles last year than they sold.
-Ralph


----------



## Peacock

begleytree said:


> compared to what?
> Toyota recalled more vehicles last year than they sold.
> -Ralph




They also have quite a few issues on the last gen Tundra. The new model has a weak frame, terrible fit and finish and the less capability than the competitors.


----------



## beowulf343

Ok-not an expert here-don't even own a 1/2 ton, just 2 3/4 tons. But several friends of mine just bought new toyota, ford, and chevy half tons in the last few years. Seems like the toyota is the only one staying out of the shop. But that's just my second-hand observation.


----------



## 2000ssm6

All makes will have some kind of problems now or later, some more than others. I think Chevy and Ford are the best but the new Tundra 5.7 may beat them in the long run. Dodge/Chrysler just don't seem to hold up well, drivetrains more so.

Now on another topic: ASE certification doesn't mean chit, it will get you more pay but hands on/experience blows those tests out of the water. I know many techs that have certs and can't work on a car. As a tech. I have taken a few but only when it gets slow(not many times as I stay busy). An experienced service manager knows when he has a good tech. no matter what a peice of paper tells him.


----------



## Freakingstang

I love my half ton chevy. It rolled over 202K miles this weekend. No major problems other than rear brakes. There has been some general maintence, but that is expected at 200K...

It has withstood the test of me beating the snot out of it for the last 6 years..I'd buy another in a heartbeat (pun intended) lol. 

I would like to have a 3/4 ton HD or 1 ton with the Duramax in it, though. This has been the beefiest half ton I have owned. I really should have a 3/4 ton at the minimum and this truck has taken it share of abuse and come back beggin for more.


----------



## sawinredneck

Freakingstang said:


> I love my half ton chevy. It rolled over 202K miles this weekend. No major problems other than rear brakes. There has been some general maintence, but that is expected at 200K...
> 
> It has withstood the test of me beating the snot out of it for the last 6 years..I'd buy another in a heartbeat (pun intended) lol.
> 
> I would like to have a 3/4 ton HD or 1 ton with the Duramax in it, though. This has been the beefiest half ton I have owned. I really should have a 3/4 ton at the minimum and this truck has taken it share of abuse and come back beggin for more.



But.................... What year is it Steve?


----------



## Freakingstang

1999. Same truck up through 06, the 07's are differant from what I hear.


----------



## sawinredneck

I am not sure what year they changed. I will give them this, they have the best GAS engine going right now! Still won't own one. I hate the fact that my next one will likely be a Dodge, but thats going to be a 3/4-1 ton, so it's not relevent here.


----------



## RaisedByWolves

Freakingstang said:


> No major problems other than rear brakes.
> 
> It has withstood the test of me beating the snot out of it for the last 6 years..I'd buy another in a heartbeat (pun intended) lol.





I have had problems with my silverado. The ummm, parking brake is lame and, umm thats it! 


I beat the snot out of mine with regularity, my favorite trick is blowing off tuner cars and older camaros.


Sometimes I think the ricers think I missed a shift with the revs these newer Vortechs get up to, the main thing I would like to change would be to get a Power programmer to raise and firm up the shift points, and get some helper springs for stunts like this.
















Comfort, class, power, the Silverado is the way to go!


----------



## NYH1

sawinredneck said:


> I am not sure what year they changed. I will give them this, they have the best GAS engine going right now! Still won't own one. I hate the fact that my next one will likely be a Dodge, but thats going to be a 3/4-1 ton, so it's not relevent here.


sawinredneck, you got a PM!


----------



## rb_in_va

2000ssm6 said:


> Now on another topic: ASE certification doesn't mean chit, it will get you more pay but hands on/experience blows those tests out of the water. I know many techs that have certs and can't work on a car. As a tech. I have taken a few but only when it gets slow(not many times as I stay busy). An experienced service manager knows when he has a good tech. no matter what a peice of paper tells him.



My neighbor is a mechanic, and he said the ASE test is computer based, and you just take keep taking it till you pass. He's not impressed with the cert, so he hasn't bothered to pursue it.


----------



## BlueRidgeMark

NYH1 said:


> he was just as busy when he worked at Toyota and GMC/Chevy dealers as he was when he worked at Chrysler dealers. Warranty and service work included.



Of course he was. Any dealership that can't keep their mechanics busy will lay them off.


A better check is to ask independant mechanics, not dealer mechanics.


----------



## Peacock

BlueRidgeMark said:


> Of course he was. Any dealership that can't keep their mechanics busy will lay them off.



Not totally true. A flat rate tech like myself costs the dealer nothing when not making money.

I make more hours working for Honda than I did at the Ford dealer. Honda have more problems? Not by a LOOOONNNNGGG shot. More maintenance and better customers. It's laughable how much better Honda the corporation takes care of it's customers.

My experience on trucks is based on my Ford dealer experience and that of hundreds(thousands?) of used cars of all makes. IMO, GM makes the most reliable of all trucks. 

The Cummins, btw is the most overrated of the diesels. We do on average 1-2 pumps per week....at over 2k each.


----------



## BlueRidgeMark

Thanks for that correction. I didn't know dealerships used flat rate.


Good insight on business vs. quality of product. There are obviously a lot more variables to consider.


----------



## BIG JAKE

Freakingstang said:


> I love my half ton chevy. It rolled over 202K miles this weekend. No major problems other than rear brakes. There has been some general maintence, but that is expected at 200K...
> 
> It has withstood the test of me beating the snot out of it for the last 6 years..I'd buy another in a heartbeat (pun intended) lol.
> 
> I would like to have a 3/4 ton HD or 1 ton with the Duramax in it, though. This has been the beefiest half ton I have owned. I really should have a 3/4 ton at the minimum and this truck has taken it share of abuse and come back beggin for more.



You won't be sorry with a D-max. Talk about comfort. My truck has 119K-no issues. I had the same luck as you with my half ton GM's. I really should have had a 3/4 or 1 ton for what I was doing to those trucks but it never hurt em'.


----------



## BIG JAKE

rahtreelimbs said:


> Who is???




Whichever one the girl comes with-Oops, I shouldn't say that I'm married!


----------



## bytehoven

sawinredneck said:


> I hate the fact that my next one will likely be a Dodge, but thats going to be a 3/4-1 ton, so it's not relevent here.



That's what I bought in January, a Ram 2500 Quad Cab SLT. I test drove both the 1500 & 2500, to see if the ride was softer on the 1/2, which it was not.

I prefer the solid front axle on the 2500 over IFS on the 1500. Many 1/2 ton trucks have the IFS.

There was no really fuel economy savings with the 1500, and the cost was only slightly less. 

All in all, it seemed like a no brainer to go with the 3/4 ton. 

I think it's a tougher choice deciding between a 3/4 & 1 ton and then spending the extra $5-6K on a diesel.

If I had better diesel fuel options in my neck of the woods, I might have been tempted by the Cummins. However, with only a couple of stations charging way more than gas, driving a diesel would be a big hassle and just as costly. 

I test drove a couple of CTD 2500s and I could get used to driving a diesel.

I'm waiting to test drive one of the '07 Rams with the new 6.1 CTD and 6 speed auto tranny.

BTW... to answer the original question, the new Toyota Tundra being built to almost a 3/4 ton performance spec, might give it the edge over other 1/2 trucks. One big downside to the Toyota, they won't knock $10-12K off the MSRP like orther manufactures.


----------



## huskydave

I drive jap vehicles You can't kill em and they hold their value!


----------



## Peacock

bytehoven said:


> ...Toyota Tundra being built to almost a 3/4 ton performance spec, might give it the edge over other 1/2 trucks. One big downside to the Toyota, they won't knock $10-12K off the MSRP like orther manufactures.



In many ways the Tundra is built to lesser standards than all other 1/2 tons. Look closely at it's payload and towing capacity with different cab/bed combos. It is consistently lesser of a truck than the GM and Ford models.

BTW....the new Cummins is a 6.7L...:biggrinbounce2:


----------



## 2000ssm6

Peacock said:


> Not totally true. A flat rate tech like myself costs the dealer nothing when not making money.
> 
> I make more hours working for Honda than I did at the Ford dealer. Honda have more problems? Not by a LOOOONNNNGGG shot. More maintenance and better customers. It's laughable how much better Honda the corporation takes care of it's customers.
> 
> 
> 
> That is very true. Most people think techs make good money. Many can but warranty work just kills our checks. When we don't turn wrenches, we don't get paid. The best place for a GOOD tech to make $ is a big city and a known good dealer.
Click to expand...


----------



## Peacock

2000ssm6 said:


> Peacock said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not totally true. A flat rate tech like myself costs the dealer nothing when not making money.
> 
> I make more hours working for Honda than I did at the Ford dealer. Honda have more problems? Not by a LOOOONNNNGGG shot. More maintenance and better customers. It's laughable how much better Honda the corporation takes care of it's customers.
> 
> 
> 
> That is very true. Most people think techs make good money. Many can but warranty work just kills our checks. When we don't turn wrenches, we don't get paid. The best place for a GOOD tech to make $ is a big city and a known good dealer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You said it. Nothing worse than spending the day making NOTHING!!!
> 
> My last 3 weeks have gone 65hrs, 44hrs and 33hrs. That's not a typical example, but shows people how it can be. I generally average right at 50hrs per week here.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## 2000ssm6

Yeah, I usually stay around 40-45 per week. Those 20 hour weeks are rough and the 70s are great. It is hard to determine how much you can spend when it goes from fast to slow in a snap.


----------



## sawinredneck

NYH1 said:


> sawinredneck, you got a PM!



Replied, thank you!!


----------



## NYH1

2000ssm6 said:


> Now on another topic: ASE certification doesn't mean chit, it will get you more pay but hands on/experience blows those tests out of the water. I know many techs that have certs and can't work on a car. As a tech. I have taken a few but only when it gets slow(not many times as I stay busy). An experienced service manager knows when he has a good tech. no matter what a peice of paper tells him.


I agree. My friend has both his ASE certification's and A LOT of hands on/experience. The last two dealerships he worked at he was paid half the dealer's labor rate. Example- if the dealerships labor rate was $50 per hour, he was paid $25 per hour. I don't know if this is common practice in dealership repair shops or not. He owns his own repair shop now and has been successful so far.


----------



## Peacock

NYH1 said:


> I agree. My friend has both his ASE certification's and A LOT of hands on/experience. The last two dealerships he worked at he was paid half the dealer's labor rate. Example- if the dealerships labor rate was $50 per hour, he was paid $25 per hour. I don't know if this is common practice in dealership repair shops or not. He owns his own repair shop now and has been successful so far.



Not common at all. Around here a dealer rate is about 80-85. My hourly rate is nowhere near 40. Most guys around here top out around 25.

That was a common practice in the '60's and '70's though.


----------



## rb_in_va

Who makes the best half-ton trucks? Ford, Chevy or Dodge.











20-30 years ago!


----------



## NYH1

Peacock said:


> Not common at all. Around here a dealer rate is about 80-85. My hourly rate is nowhere near 40. Most guys around here top out around 25.
> 
> That was a common practice in the '60's and '70's though.


I was just using the $50 labor rate as an example. I believe most labor rates in this area are around $60 to $70 now. I have to stop by a dealer today actually. If I remember I'll look for the rate. My friends owned his own repair shop for the last four or five years now.


----------



## Freakingstang

sawinredneck said:


> I am not sure what year they changed. I will give them this, they have the best GAS engine going right now! Still won't own one. I hate the fact that my next one will likely be a Dodge, but thats going to be a 3/4-1 ton, so it's not relevent here.



uh, negative batman....When My work truck broke, they sent in a 2004 ram 1500 with the 4.7 V8 in it as a temporary replacement until my new one showed up...Talk about a squishy azz work truck. The only thing I liked about it was the amount of cab room behind the seat was more than the chevy.

Of coarse my ext cab Dmax has all that and then some. I work on Cummins motors all day long (industrial) and they are a stout, reliable power plant, the truck it is in is less than desirable. I want my own Dmax now!!!!! I love this truck!


----------



## Freakingstang

RaisedByWolves said:


> I have had problems with my silverado. The ummm, parking brake is lame and, umm thats it!
> 
> 
> I beat the snot out of mine with regularity, my favorite trick is blowing off tuner cars and older camaros.
> 
> 
> Sometimes I think the ricers think I missed a shift with the revs these newer Vortechs get up to, the main thing I would like to change would be to get a Power programmer to raise and firm up the shift points, and get some helper springs for stunts like this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Comfort, class, power, the Silverado is the way to go!



Mine has dusted a few too. The tow haul mode really firms up the shifts nicely. The one thing I like is that the GM has the firmest shifting tranny out of the box. That dodge I had, you could barely tell it shifted, just the rpms dropped. The ford slide-o-matics are just as bad


----------



## bbqmannn

honda


----------



## NYH1

Freakingstang said:


> Mine has dusted a few too. The tow haul mode really firms up the shifts nicely. The one thing I like is that the GM has the firmest shifting tranny out of the box. That dodge I had, you could barely tell it shifted, just the rpms dropped. The ford slide-o-matics are just as bad


When my Dodge shifts you can definitely feel it. Mine has the Hemi, 5 speed auto and 3:92's.


----------



## redprospector

rb_in_va said:


> Who makes the best half-ton trucks? Ford, Chevy or Dodge.
> 20-30 years ago!



How true! I like to go back a little further though. You'd need to buy at least a 3/4 ton to equal one of the old 1/2 tons.

Andy


----------



## ben14826

bbqmannn said:


> honda



:jester:


----------



## CaseyForrest

Hard to judge 1/2 tons and 3/4 tons going by payload. My Colorado has a 1500# payload capacity. 

Personally Im split between Chevy and Ford.


----------



## rb_in_va

redprospector said:


> How true! I like to go back a little further though. You'd need to buy at least a 3/4 ton to equal one of the old 1/2 tons.
> 
> Andy



It's probably because trucks have become more popular with people that don't use them as trucks, and then those folks whine that they drive and handle like trucks. So you now have a whole new batch of what I like to call girltrucks.


----------



## bbqmannn

had a 1995 f150 300/5spd s/c truck was a puller .. not fast but never tell me no ... especially when loaded with a bed past the window full o green mesquite or 15 rr/ties.... or 1 1/2 pallets of st.augustine grass for the home... dont own a honda just thought i would thro that in fer arguments sake ... writing from beautiful sandy Iraq....


----------



## rb_in_va

bbqmannn said:


> had a 1995 f150 300/5spd s/c truck was a puller .. not fast but never tell me no ... especially when loaded with a bed past the window full o green mesquite or 15 rr/ties.... or 1 1/2 pallets of st.augustine grass for the home... dont own a honda just thought i would thro that in fer arguments sake ... writing from beautiful sandy Iraq....



bbqman,
That's a 95 F-150 in my avatar. I like it a lot!


----------



## BlueRidgeMark

CaseyForrest said:


> Personally Im split between Chevy and Ford.




Ooohh! That's gotta hurt!


----------



## BlueRidgeMark

redprospector said:


> How true! I like to go back a little further though. You'd need to buy at least a 3/4 ton to equal one of the old 1/2 tons.
> 
> Andy




I'd love to get my hands on an old Army 5 quarter ton. About the size of most half tons, with a 5/4 payload, and it would climb a wall!

Not quickly, mind you, but it would climb it.


----------



## rb_in_va

BlueRidgeMark said:


> Ooohh! That's gotta hurt!



Not as bad as being split between Ford and Honda!

jk, my Honda is a car. As far as trucks go it's no contest.


----------



## Freakingstang

CaseyForrest said:


> Hard to judge 1/2 tons and 3/4 tons going by payload. My Colorado has a 1500# payload capacity.
> 
> Personally Im split between Chevy and Ford.



My manager has one of those, 4x4 crew cab. we put about 800 pounds in the bed once.....He will never do that again.....!

Hope yours has a better suspension on it than his does....


----------



## BlueRidgeMark

I put an 800 pound generator in my Nissan and hauled it a couple of hours, with no problem.


----------



## Freakingstang

BlueRidgeMark said:


> uzzled:
> 
> I put an 800 pound generator in my Nissan and hauled it a couple of hours, with no problem.



Yeah, I miss my old ranger. Had a 4 wheel drive ext cab with the big six cylinder. Was great on gas if you drove it easy, had the capacity of a half ton and would tow my car and trailer to the race track. Still kick myself for getting rid of that, especially with the price of fuel lately. That truck haulled more firewood than all of my previous trucks combined!


----------



## OTG BOSTON

*Thought it needed repeating............*



OTG BOSTON said:


> Can't say enough about my Tundra. If I were to buy a 3/4 or 1 ton It'd be a Chevy



And I forgot to add. By the time I need to replace my Tundra, Toyota will probably be making a 3/4, and 1 ton that will be even better.

:hmm3grin2orange: :hmm3grin2orange: :hmm3grin2orange:


----------



## rb_in_va

BlueRidgeMark said:


> I put an 800 pound generator in my Nissan and hauled it a couple of hours, with no problem.



Pic? Here's the most weight I ever put in my old Nissan. Any idea how much this much chips weighs?

http://www.arboristsite.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=43157&d=1168015836


----------



## CaseyForrest

Freakingstang said:


> My manager has one of those, 4x4 crew cab. we put about 800 pounds in the bed once.....He will never do that again.....!
> 
> Hope yours has a better suspension on it than his does....



There was probably more weight behind the rear axle then over it. Those crew cabs dont give you allot of bedspace ahead of the rear axle. 

Ive probably had close to 800 in the bed with no issues. But I dont usually use the bed for hauling anything, thats what the trailer is for.


----------



## CaseyForrest

BlueRidgeMark said:


> Ooohh! That's gotta hurt!



Oh, it does especially since I prefer Jap vehicles. My only saving grace is Isuzu played a major role in designing the motor in my truck. Other than it being a tad rough at idle, it performs flawlessly and has plenty of ommph for what I need.


----------



## Peacock

CaseyForrest said:


> Oh, it does especially since I prefer Jap vehicles. My only saving grace is Isuzu played a major role in designing the motor in my truck. Other than it being a tad rough at idle, it performs flawlessly and has plenty of ommph for what I need.



The Atlas engines in the GMT 355 and 360 trucks are excellent. Engines have normally been a strong point for the general anyhow. The Gen. III/IV gas V8's are easily the best gas truck engines on the market.

I still laugh at the new Tundra. Like I already said, in many ways it is the _least_ capable of the current 1/2 tons. Only certain cab configurations give you the max. towing or payload. Thank the c-channel frame for that.


----------



## BlueRidgeMark

rb_in_va said:


> Pic?



Of the truck? Or the generator? Or the generator in the truck?


The generator is one of these:






The data plate on it lists it as 800 pounds. I don't have a picture of it in the truck. In the pic above (snagged from a surplus store website) it's sitting in a ton and a half truck.


----------



## hornett22

*i never had trouble hauling with a toyota.*

sure,it may not haul as much but it keeps going.

as for the c channel frame,everyone has and still uses it.i see the old style tundra working hard around here and not slowing down.

as for recalls,at least toyota does it while the problem exists and not after everyone has paid to fix the problem out of their own pockets.
i used to be a toyota mechanic and i replaced motors with over 200k with a new block from the manufacturer.when have you seen the big three do that?their last recall i know of was on ball joints and you got an allignment included.they did the headgasket recall for 10 years.where was ford on the 3.8 headgasket recall? i think it lasted 10 minutes.my buddies F-350 just lost the tranny at 31k,and all he tows is a pontoon boat on weekends.pretty lame. 

i used to be a chevy and dodge mechanic as well.no way i'd ever buy a dodge.fit and finish sucks.

i'll always liked chevies and always will but that 2nd reverse clutch hub problem they scammed everyone on was BS. 

nissan is owned by the french now so they are out of the question.

i still miss solid front axle trucks.i'll keep my 85 toyota.i'd love to buy american but they need to get a handle on quality control soon.


----------



## NovaMan

hornett22 said:


> nissan is owned by the french now so they are out of the question.


 Just don't like the French, or would you care to elaborate?


----------



## a_lopa

V8 diesel landcruiser IMO


----------



## Pcoz88

*chevy*

chevy:jawdrop:


----------



## Tzed250

I love my '06 Nissan Titan KC 4x4 SE...:spam:


----------



## 2000ssm6

Tzed250 said:


> I love my '06 Nissan Titan KC 4x4 SE...:spam:



They don't have too many problems. The most I hear are, "hey, I'm only getting 12 miles to the gallon, can you fix that?"

Then I say, yeah keep your foot out of the gas all the time.:hmm3grin2orange:


----------



## Stihl4life

Chevy, but i do think that anything diesel Dodge owns. The cummins is hands down the best.


----------



## clearance

1/2 tons are for women, said it here before, saying it again, get real truck, not some weak junk with a cars rear axle (and suspension).


----------



## rb_in_va

Tzed250 said:


> I love my '06 Nissan Titan KC 4x4 SE...:spam:



Just curious, what does it look like when you haul 4X8 sheets of plywood?


----------



## NYH1

clearance said:


> 1/2 tons are for women, said it here before, saying it again, get real truck, not some weak junk with a cars rear axle (and suspension).


I lease a 2007 Dodge Ram *1500* SLT Quad Cab 4x4 pick up. It has the Hemi, auto tranny, 3:92 gears with limited slip rear end, and is pretty much loaded. The sticker price on my truck was $36,475. I put $2000 down and it cost $284 a month. A 2007 Dodge Ram *2500* SLT Quad Cab 4x4 pick up with the same basic equipment (excluding 3/4 ton axles, transfer case, brakes, drive shafts ect. basically the things I don't need) stickers for $38,165. With $2000 down it would cost $428 a month. 

I use this truck for general transportation 99% of the time. I got 4x4 because I live in Central New York and we average 120 inches of snow a year, twice that a half hour north of me (Tug Hill Plateau) where I hunt on occasion. Plus the road to our hunting camp (where I regularly hunt) is seasonal and not maintained. I tow a four place ATV trailer which weighs about 4500 pounds fully loaded, my truck can tow 7400 pounds, I lose 1100 pounds of towing capacity because it has 20 inch wheels, no biggy. I'll probably never put more then 1000 pounds in the box which is rated at 1300 pounds. Why would I want give up the half ton ride, pay $144 more a month or $3888 over the life of the lease for something I'll never need. The monthly price difference is almost what I pay in gas in a month. I'll keep the half ton!


----------



## rahtreelimbs

clearance said:


> 1/2 tons are for women, said it here before, saying it again, get real truck, not some weak junk with a cars rear axle (and suspension).




Why pay for more than you need???


----------



## bytehoven

When I bought my Ram '06 2500 QC in January, the deals offered were very close to the 1500. 

Test driving both the 1500 and 2500, I did not notice a ride quality advantage with the 1500, as it seemed just as firm and loose over washboard road surfaces.

I upgraded the shocks on the 2500 to Bilstein series 5100 and what a difference. I'm sure the Bilstein shocks would help out a 1500 just as much.

I prefer the solid front axle on the 2500 to the IFS on the 1500. The 2500 rides a little higher and fit larger tires without any mods. I anticipate the larger brakes on the 2500 will last a little longer, and the other HD drive train components might also fair better in the long run.

I figure the 2500 might also have better resale down the road, despite being very close in price to the 1500.

If I had better/more/cheaper diesel fuel sellers in my area, I might have gone with the Cummins. However, I don't put a lot of mileage on my vehicles, only 2300 miles on the 2500 since January. I was afraid I would not be running the diesel enough to keep it clean.

The 2500 does everything I need and the fuel economy has been getting better since I pushed past 1500 miles. I figure I'll switch over to Mobil 1 at 5K, and I will do even better.


----------



## NYH1

bytehoven, when I got my truck at the end of March of this year the prices were as I listed. I'm talking SLT models similarly equipped. I looked at both and had them run the numbers on both. I wanted a truck but didn't/don't need a 3/4 ton. To me the 2500's have a noticeably stiffer ride then the 1500's. I doubt the brakes on a 2500 will last much longer, if any longer at all then on a 1500. The 2500 is heavier to begin with. That's going to cause more brake wear, but they will cost more to replace! 

If someone needs or wants a 3/4 or 1 ton truck then by all means get a 3/4 or 1 ton truck. It doesn't make any sense to knock someone who buys a 1/2 ton truck when they don't need a 3/4 or 1 ton truck.

What engine do you have and what are you getting for mileage? My truck has about 1800 miles on it. I'm getting 11.5 MPG in the city, which is almost as much stop as it is go. And 18 MPH on the highway. I set the cruse at 70 MPH. I put a tonneau cover it today. That might help a little.


----------



## rb_in_va

NYH1 said:


> I lease a 2007 Dodge Ram *1500* SLT Quad Cab 4x4 pick up. It has the Hemi, auto tranny, 3:92 gears with limited slip rear end, and is pretty much loaded. The sticker price on my truck was $36,475. I put $2000 down and it cost $284 a month. A 2007 Dodge Ram *2500* SLT Quad Cab 4x4 pick up with the same basic equipment (excluding 3/4 ton axles, transfer case, brakes, drive shafts ect. basically the things I don't need) stickers for $38,165. With $2000 down it would cost $428 a month.
> 
> I use this truck for general transportation 99% of the time. I got 4x4 because I live in Central New York and we average 120 inches of snow a year, twice that a half hour north of me (Tug Hill Plateau) where I hunt on occasion. Plus the road to our hunting camp (where I regularly hunt) is seasonal and not maintained. I tow a four place ATV trailer which weighs about 4500 pounds fully loaded, my truck can tow 7400 pounds, I lose 1100 pounds of towing capacity because it has 20 inch wheels, no biggy. I'll probably never put more then 1000 pounds in the box which is rated at 1300 pounds. Why would I want give up the half ton ride, pay $144 more a month or $3888 over the life of the lease for something I'll never need. The monthly price difference is almost what I pay in gas in a month. I'll keep the half ton!





rahtreelimbs said:


> Why pay for more than you need???



Agree 100%. I like having a truck for the occasion when I actually haul something. Like this past weekend when I went to HD to get 4 pieces of 8' baseboard molding. I am sure I would have looked more manly hauling that load in a 3/4 ton, but the 1/2 is adequate for me.


----------



## bytehoven

NYH1 said:


> It doesn't make any sense to knock someone who buys a 1/2 ton truck when they don't need a 3/4 or 1 ton truck.



Hey, I'm not knocking the 1500 or 1/2 ton trucks. My only real gripe with the 1500 is the IFS, which is a little less off-road friendly than a solid axle up front.

I have the Hemi with everything factory but a muffler upgrade to the Super Turbo. On BP 87 octane, I'm getting between 10-11 mpg in the city, and I too am pushing 18 mpg on the hywy with no bed cover. If I can get around to choosing between a cap or a hard cover, I'm sure that and the switch to synthetic will get me some additional hywy mpg. I have 3.73 rear, so your 3.92 and lighter weight helps ya get better city economy.

It might been unfair to compare prices of the leftover '06 1500 & 2500 models, which were both getting mega discounts. In general, the 1500 gets much better factory/dealer incentives because the heavier trucks have strong sales to commercial buyers.

Perhaps my test drive observation of the 1500 and 2500 was flawed, but they seemed nearly identical to me.

Again... I'm not knock your choice of the 1500 or anyone else's choice. Hey, I might have bought a 1500 if I could have found agreat deal on a used one with low mileage.


----------



## chowdozer

Tzed250 said:


> I love my '06 Nissan Titan KC 4x4 SE...:spam:



A friend of mine has a '04 2wd. It's going in next week for a free front brake job because of all the front brake problems it's had. I think he's got around 40K on it. It's already had new rotors and pads. Today he told me the front springs are sacked and it's sitting on the bumpstops.


----------



## rb_in_va

chowdozer said:


> A friend of mine has a '04 2wd. It's going in next week for a free front brake job because of all the front brake problems it's had. I think he's got around 40K on it. It's already had new rotors and pads. Today he told me the front springs are sacked and it's sitting on the bumpstops.



My dad had brake problems on his 02 F-250 a few years ago. He was driving down the highway and the brakes were sort of half engaged. He had nothing but problems with the brakes on that truck. Wasn't 04 the first year for the Titan? Sounds like Nissan is trying to make it right though. Funny I used to think the Titan was a nice looking truck. Then I got my F-150!


----------



## Pilsnaman

*I wish there was a clear answer*

I have been doing a lot of research because I am also looking at what truck to buy next. Here is what I have found so far with 1/2 tuns. Please note that this is all just MHO and I know a lot of people disagree with this.
-Chevy seems to have one of the best truck engines today. Good low end grunt and will will with ease. On the other hand I am not impressed with their interiors and think the truck body/suspension is geared a little too much toward the weekend warier and not a work truck. Reliability seems to be on par with Ford but that is subjective.
-Ford has a truck that (IMHO) looks like a work truck and has a frame and suspension to match. On the other hand, their engines are not all that great from a power/towing standpoint, especially the 4.6L. If you get a F150 make sure the 5.4L is in there. Oh, and the mpg doesn't seem to be as good as the Chevys.
-Dodge I have heard very little good about. While some seem to have good luck with them most of what I hear indicates a lot of problems, especially transmission, and very low mpg, especially with the Hemi. One little fact about the Hemi, it is mostly hype and that makes sense. The hemispherical head design is outdated as new designs have proven more efficient, especially has they allow for multi-valve designs.
-Toyota is an interesting one in my book. They have that record of reliability, but then my dad's '01 Tundra has had a lot of problems both electrical and fit-and-finish. I think the first design was a little small for a 1/2 ton, really made for runs to HD and towing a bass boat. The new one is more commercial hype in my book then anything else. A great example is the tri-frame they try to brag about, having a c-channel frame under the bed and where the tow hitch is doesn't seem like a good thing to me. It is way to early for any of us to look at reliability of new Tundras.


----------



## WACutter

*My Experience on 1/2 and 3/4 Tons*

Hi,

Here is my take on these based on ownership experiences by myself or family members:

2000 Chevy 1/2 4x4. Nice interior, fair power, 14 mpg. Brother still has this one after 100k. Seems like it had frequent problems the first few years, now seems pretty solid. Always starts. Handles lousy. Local Dealership: Ok

Ford: 2002 3/4 ton 4x4 Diesel - Styled nicely, comfortable interiors, lots of problems with 3/4 ton A/T's apparently. Made 6 dealership visits the first year of ownership. Mechanically a POS. Local dealership experiences: Poor

Dodge: 2003 3/4 4x2 x-cab Hemi 5sp, Nice runner, fast, pretty well made: 12 mpg with a light foot. Towed 4k trailer with ease. Bed with 1k in it, no problem at all. Dealership experience: OK

Dodge 2001 3/4 4x4 Diesel; great power, pretty well made, could tow a small town, 18mpg. Getting almost too big to drive and park in the city, though. LOVED the 6sp manual!

Toyota 1995 Mini Pickup x-cab v6 4x4 5sp- Put 180k on this with NO major service other than timing belt. 20mpg. Towed 3k trailer ok, but slow going up the passes. Great quality and bulletproof. Dealership: Very good

Toyota Tundra 2006 (current) - x-cab 4x4 v8 A/T - Super smooth, 17 mpg around town 20 hwy, pretty fast (feels faster than the hemi dodge). Tows 4K no problem, even up the passes. Quality is very good, better than the current domestics, although not quite up to the older Toyota. Up to 1K in the bed, ok. More, forget it. Wish it didn't have the suicide doors in the back. Seems like about as big as you can get and still manouver in crowded cities. Like the size; the new Tundras are just getting too big. Would LOVE a diesel option and a manual tranny.

Perfect Truck:
Mid-size: re old Tundra, 3/4t 4x4 diesel w 6sp. 

Ron


----------



## lxt

redprospector said:


> How true! I like to go back a little further though. You'd need to buy at least a 3/4 ton to equal one of the old 1/2 tons.
> 
> Andy



I second that, its a shame when a 1978 ford 3/4 ton can out haul a 2007 3/4 ford. ahh the old trucks!! real steel, 4speed tranny that was bullet proof, slow & not enviromentally friendly by todays standards. but those were when trucks were built to work!! not grocery shop.

LXT...........


----------



## 2000ssm6

*Yep*



rb_in_va said:


> My dad had brake problems on his 02 F-250 a few years ago. He was driving down the highway and the brakes were sort of half engaged. He had nothing but problems with the brakes on that truck. Wasn't 04 the first year for the Titan? Sounds like Nissan is trying to make it right though. Funny I used to think the Titan was a nice looking truck. Then I got my F-150!



Nissan fixed all of the brake problems....The good thing was they noticed it and made a effort to fix it while under warrenty.


----------



## clearance

lxt said:


> I second that, its a shame when a 1978 ford 3/4 ton can out haul a 2007 3/4 ford. ahh the old trucks!! real steel, 4speed tranny that was bullet proof, slow & not enviromentally friendly by todays standards. but those were when trucks were built to work!! not grocery shop.
> 
> LXT...........



You know it, real steel, not plastic junk. Those old trucks are great, easy to work on, built tough. I looked at my nieghbors new Dodge 1/2 ton, looked like I could rip the plastic front end apart with my hands.


----------



## Peacock

clearance said:


> You know it, real steel, not plastic junk. Those old trucks are great, easy to work on, built tough. I looked at my nieghbors new Dodge 1/2 ton, looked like I could rip the plastic front end apart with my hands.



The difference is the floppy c-channel frame on old trucks. Load one up and watch the gap between the bed and cab move.


----------



## lxt

Peacock said:


> The difference is the floppy c-channel frame on old trucks. Load one up and watch the gap between the bed and cab move.



What? Peacock I load up the old trucks with twice as much weight & the cab to bed gap has never changed!!! hell my 1 ton dump has easily hauls 3 tons a new one ton would be squatting to the ground & could barely pull the load!!

the problem with new trucks is they became a fashion statement & the big three jumped on board, cheapining the overall purpose of what a truck is to be used for!! c`mon plastic grills, mirrors, door handles, dashboards, even the four wheel drive hub locks are now plastic. MMmm I thought plastic was cheaper than steel? but a new plastic truck will cost some bucks!!!

LXT........


----------



## Peacock

lxt said:


> What? Peacock I load up the old trucks with twice as much weight & the cab to bed gap has never changed!!! hell my 1 ton dump has easily hauls 3 tons a new one ton would be squatting to the ground & could barely pull the load!!
> 
> 
> LXT........



We had a '68 3/4 ton Chevy. Loaded it with wood even with the top of the cab. You could see the frame flex. It's not hard to tell that the frame on new trucks is MUCH stronger than older trucks. Just look at them. Body is junk on new, no arguing that at all. New drivetrain is both better and worse. 

Any new 1 ton will EASILY out pull any old truck. The engines are worlds more powerful. The only reason our old '68 hauled that much wood was because of the DEEP gearing.


----------



## lxt

Peacock said:


> Any new 1 ton will EASILY out pull any old truck. The engines are worlds more powerful. The only reason our old '68 hauled that much wood was because of the DEEP gearing.



I totally disagree!! I`ll put my 79 1-ton up against any new 1 ton of equal comparison & out haul with no problem!!!

as a matter of fact & I still have the weight cert. my father thinkin this truck is a tri axle, loaded 200 8 inch block along with the premix mortar bags onto it, total laden weight was 9800lbs. no one with a new 1 ton I know would even attempt to do this!!! (and not that I blame them)

as far as engines go, the only thing that has changed for the better is the fuel delivery system & im not so sure about that, a good 4 barrel on a 350 chevy delivers good power!! 

I`ll tell ya, out my way alot of the fairs have the demolition derby`s the complaint many are hearing is in the next 10 years this type of recreation will fall by the way side due to the newer vehicles being built like crap & the older vehicles are becoming rare, the newer vehicles wont stand the test of time your hauling wood in a 68 , see if a 2000 model will be around in 2039!!

LXT..............


----------



## rb_in_va

lxt said:


> I totally disagree!! I`ll put my 79 1-ton up against any new 1 ton of equal comparison & out haul with no problem!!!



Sounds like we've got a new event for any GTGs! Old vs. New truck throwdown!


----------



## t613

*Tundra is the answer?*

There have been a number of problems with the Tundra since it's introduction (current version). They were given a "well above average" rating by Consumer Reports before and right when they came out. VERY soon after, were given a "well below average" for the v-8 4x4s. I know they had customers that loaded ATVs and such in the beds and taco'd the tailgate. The last I heard, Toyota wasn't helping owners with the gate issues. I believe the site was www. tundrasolutions.com with pics of the folded gates.

I'm not bashing, but don't buy that they are hands down better than the others on the market.

I know the Nissan's has overheating rear end issues also when they first came out, so not bulletproof either. They are still not so good with CR ratings.

Good luck with the search/hunt!


----------



## WACutter

*New Tundra*

I rented a 2007 Tundra and drove it for 1000 miles; it's a really nice truck. It is very powerful, but thirsty (I got around 13 mpg 50/50 city/hwy). I am up on tundrasolutions.com a lot. The new Tundras do have a problem with a weak tailgate, and Toyota has not come up with a redesign as of yet. Shame on Toyota. I'll wait another year or two before I think about giving up my 2006 Tundra.


----------



## hornett22

*all that is wrong with it is a tailgate?*

how long has ford been making trucks? they should have no problems by now but oddly enough,the list is endless.from transmission failures,fuel line fires,and spark plugs shooting out of the head.and that is just the beginning.


----------



## bcorradi

hornett22 said:


> how long has ford been making trucks? they should have no problems by now but oddly enough,the list is endless.from transmission failures,fuel line fires,and spark plugs shooting out of the head.and that is just the beginning.



I've owned a lot of ford trucks and have not had any of the above mentioned problems...I guess I must be just lucky. All my tailgates work fine too .


----------



## Freakingstang

bcorradi said:


> I've owned a lot of ford trucks and have not had any of the above mentioned problems...I guess I must be just lucky. All my tailgates work fine too .



No front end problems with the older body's? Every one I owned needed the tires rotated every 1500 miles.


----------



## WACutter

*I Still Think Toyota's Have the Quality Edge*

All autos have problems. My brothers' Ford 02 3/4 ton Diesel went through 2 A/T's in 30Kmi. He was towing a 2000# trailer. He had other mechanical problems to the point the truck was at the dealership more than in his driveway. That is just silly. It was a total POS.

While American trucks seem more reliable than they were 20 years ago, my experience is that Toyota has their act together more than most. I had 4 new Toys over the last 25 years or so, as well as 2 new Dodges, 1 new Jeep, and a new Chevy. All of the domestics had multiple problems that took trips to the dealer to solve.

Out of all of the Toys, I had one recall on one truck. That's all that ever went wrong on them, other than scheduled maintainence. Luck of the draw? Maybe. As another poster said, if the tailgate is all that is wrong with the new Tundra, perhaps you can live with that. 

I really DO miss the Cummins Diesel Dodge, though!

YMMV


----------



## bcorradi

Freakingstang said:


> No front end problems with the older body's? Every one I owned needed the tires rotated every 1500 miles.


I have 105k on my 93 and haven't changed balljoints yet, but they are due now. I consider that normal maintenance after 100k. I've had my current set of tires on it for over 40k and I just pulled them off and put them on my plow truck. I think I did get the tires rotated once...but far short of the 26 odd times I guess I should have . I think your talking to ultra too much.


----------



## 04ultra

bcorradi said:


> I have 105k on my 93 and haven't changed balljoints yet, but they are due now. I consider that normal maintenance after 100k. I've had my current set of tires on it for over 40k and I just pulled them off and put them on my plow truck. I think I did get the tires rotated once...but far short of the 26 odd times I guess I should have . I think your talking to ultra too much.





Nope .....My problems with my truck were solved when I sold it ......Didn't know he had one......But I did see a 04 5.4 with a plug that blew out,And a bunch of the 6.0 PS that crapped out.....



.


----------



## Freakingstang

bcorradi said:


> I have 105k on my 93 and haven't changed balljoints yet, but they are due now. I consider that normal maintenance after 100k. I've had my current set of tires on it for over 40k and I just pulled them off and put them on my plow truck. I think I did get the tires rotated once...but far short of the 26 odd times I guess I should have . I think your talking to ultra too much.



Ultra.... He's a GMC guy...I don't think he's ever owned a ford anything.

I had an 84 F250 that I never could get aligned. put two sets of ball joints in it. They only lasted about 40K each......It was a HD with the IFS, but still..Damn thing wore tires like no other. One of the best trucks I've owned as far as power and durabilty went, just had to ratate tires every other week. lol

I had an 89 F150 that was almost as bad. Changed the ball joints twice and sold it right after. The solid axle fords where the best, short of the 98 up HD 3/4 tons. The 80-96 IFS stuff just isn't high on my dependable list.

I like my fords, but I really like my Chevy 1/2 ton. Just a better built truck all around than any of the fords I've ever had. If I used it more, I would probably get a 3/4 ton, but the free company truck makes me relize I don't need 40K sitting in the driveway rotting... My 99 F150 was ok, but only 2wd, so I don't know what the 97-03 4x4 front ends were like. Haven't driven any of the newer (04+) ones.


----------



## 04ultra

Freakingstang said:


> Ultra.... He's a GMC guy...I don't think he's ever owned a ford anything.
> 
> I had an 84 F250 that I never could get aligned. put two sets of ball joints in it. They only lasted about 40K each......It was a HD with the IFS, but still..Damn thing wore tires like no other. One of the best trucks I've owned as far as power and durabilty went, just had to ratate tires every other week. lol
> 
> I had an 89 F150 that was almost as bad. Changed the ball joints twice and sold it right after. The solid axle fords where the best, short of the 98 up HD 3/4 tons. The 80-96 IFS stuff just isn't high on my dependable list.
> 
> I like my fords, but I really like my Chevy 1/2 ton. Just a better built truck all around than any of the fords I've ever had. If I used it more, I would probably get a 3/4 ton, but the free company truck makes me relize I don't need 40K sitting in the driveway rotting... My 99 F150 was ok, but only 2wd, so I don't know what the 97-03 4x4 front ends were like. Haven't driven any of the newer (04+) ones.




My 92 F150 switched me over ...........Water over the Dam....



. 



.


----------



## Freakingstang

04ultra said:


> My 92 F150 switched me over ...........Water over the Dam....
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> .



Wow....Learn something new everyday.......:jawdrop:


----------



## bcorradi

04ultra said:


> Nope .....My problems with my truck were solved when I sold it ......Didn't know he had one......But I did see a 04 5.4 with a plug that blew out,And a bunch of the 6.0 PS that crapped out.....
> 
> 
> 
> .


What does this have to do with anything? We were talking about the need to rotate tires every 1500 miles on 80-96 ford trucks. I was never arguing that the 6.0 was a great motor and I haven't personally owned an 5.4, but know a lot of people that have had good luck with them. I even know people that like the 6.0 and have had great luck with them. Would I buy one probably not.


----------



## Woodie

Repeat after me: fully boxed frame.

'Nuff said.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IY_XMemqY18


Caveat: I work for the company. Proudly.


----------



## Woodie

Oh...almost forgot...3,080 lb. payload capacity:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tHs9aEVXoY

That's over 50% more than any 1/2 ton Chevy, and 900 lbs. more than any other 1/2 ton in the world. 

Nobody does trucks like Ford Motor Company. And this fall...I pity the other 1/2 ton competitors...


----------



## spacemule

Woodie said:


> Oh...almost forgot...3,080 lb. payload capacity:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tHs9aEVXoY
> 
> That's over 50% more than any 1/2 ton Chevy, and 900 lbs. more than any other 1/2 ton in the world.
> 
> Nobody does trucks like Ford Motor Company. And this fall...I pity the other 1/2 ton competitors...


Why do you want such high capacities in a half ton? Doesn't make sense to me. There are different size trucks for a reason. 1/2 tons are supposed to be smaller and more fuel efficient. If you need more capacity, there are 3/4, 1 , 1 1/2, 2 ton, etc. I'm not saying it's a bad truck, but I don't get building a 3/4 ton and marketing it as a half ton. What about the folks who want a half ton?


----------



## spacemule

Here's some evidence that building a 3/4 ton as a half ton might not be the best marketing technique. That extra payload costs weight. That weight costs fuel. That fuel costs dollars, dollars that wouldn't have to be spent if a half ton truck is all that is needed.



> There are two big reasons the F-150 is not the quickest half-ton pickup or fastest tow vehicle. First, it is usually heavier than similarly equipped models from the competition, and second, like GM's Silverado and Sierra, it has to make do with a four-speed automatic where Dodge, Nissan and Toyota offer a five- or six-speed automatic. (We are expecting to see six speeds in the 2009 F-150 because the Expedition's 5.4-liter already has it.)



http://www.newcartestdrive.com/review-drive.cfm?Vehicle=2008_Ford_F-150&ReviewID=3581


----------



## Woodie

spacemule said:


> Why do you want such high capacities in a half ton? Doesn't make sense to me. There are different size trucks for a reason. 1/2 tons are supposed to be smaller and more fuel efficient. If you need more capacity, there are 3/4, 1 , 1 1/2, 2 ton, etc. I'm not saying it's a bad truck, but I don't get building a 3/4 ton and marketing it as a half ton. What about the folks who want a half ton?



There are many different configurations available for the F-150, and only the heavy-duty configurations have that increased capability.

I posted that to counter the nonsense posted by others that modern 1/2-tons were girlytrucks and the like...I can't speak for the other mfgrs, but the F-150 is certainly still a truck. Yes, there are Urban Cowboy versions available for the posers of the world, but underneath those underpinnings is still a very, very capable F-150. It remains a truck designed and built to do what trucks have always been intended to do. 

So I guess the bottom line is that, if you want a truck for lighter duty, with less capability than the F-150, I recommend you visit your local Chevy dealer. 

Or if you don't want to put the lockwashers on yourself, GMC. (Hey Ultra!)


----------



## spacemule

Woodie said:


> There are many different configurations available for the F-150, and only the heavy-duty configurations have that increased capability.
> 
> I posted that to counter the nonsense posted by others that modern 1/2-tons were girlytrucks and the like...I can't speak for the other mfgrs, but the F-150 is certainly still a truck. Yes, there are Urban Cowboy versions available for the posers of the world, but underneath those underpinnings is still a very, very capable F-150. It remains a truck designed and built to do what trucks have always been intended to do.
> 
> So I guess the bottom line is that, if you want a truck for lighter duty, with less capability than the F-150, I recommend you visit your local Chevy dealer.
> 
> Or if you don't want to put the lockwashers on yourself, GMC. (Hey Ultra!)



No doubt that Ford makes good trucks, or at least the older ones I had were good. I've found each brand to have their quirks and shortcomings though. Fords have always had really tough engines that are pretty much bullet proof--well, before the new diesels that is. ;-) The problems I always had were leaking and noisy steering pumps, electrical accessories not working, and smoke coming from the steering columns. My gm's have had vastly superior electrical systems.


----------



## 04ultra

Woodie said:


> Or if you don't want to put the lockwashers on yourself, GMC. (Hey Ultra!)






Are you talking about the Ford/ Mercury thing.........Mercury comes with lockwashers and Ford you have to pay extra for them....   





.


----------



## bcorradi

04ultra said:


> Are you talking about the Ford/ Mercury thing.........Mercury comes with lockwashers and Ford you have to pay extra for them....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .



Haven't seen a mercury truck for years you?


----------



## ropensaddle

I wish Mack would make a pickup !


----------



## sawinredneck

It used to be Space, back in the day when trucks where trucks, the 1/2 ton was equivalent to today's 3/4 ton, and so on. You could load them down, and just get plain stupid without having to worry about the frame breaking (Mid 90's Dodge half ton's!!)!
Today, with all the urban cowboy crap and the EPA cracking down, they are using lighter materials and softening the ride etc. to make soccer moms happy!!!
IT'S A FRIGGING TRUCK!!!! IT'S SUPPOSED TO RIDE A LITTLE ROUGH!!! IT'S SUPPOSED TO GET CRAPPY GAS MILEAGE!!!! BUT IT BETTER HAUL WHATEVER I PUT IN THE BED!!!

Now, on a side note:
I have to say, I really never thought I would buy another Ford half ton! But the deal and options I got on mine, I just couldn't pass it up!!
I HATED the 5.4l, not big enough to do what I want/need, sucks gas, noisy, just all around, not what I wanted in a motor!!!
I was WRONG!!!! I average 17mpg (I changed over to synthetic oil), it hauls anything I have thought about, with power to spare, the thing will flat move if I stick my foot in it!!! But it is noisy!!!
I didn't like the interior, too much like a Mercedes or something, I am getting better with that, it's nice, Mama will gladly go out for a night on the town in it, and it's kinda nice/makes me feel nice, to drive something like that.
The ride is nice, it is a truck, mine has the towing package, and Mama doesn't even complain, but with the trailer loaded it sure doesn't squat much, and still has a decent ride.
I have to say, the more I drive and use it, the more I come to love it!!! And this was a hard sell for me!
I still don't like the wheel's, but I don't like any of the factory wheels on this body style.


----------



## Woodie

04ultra said:


> Are you talking about the Ford/ Mercury thing.........Mercury comes with lockwashers and Ford you have to pay extra for them....



Oh no my friend..."A GMC is just a Chevy with lock washers!!" 


.


----------



## spacemule

sawinredneck said:


> IT'S A FRIGGING TRUCK!!!! IT'S SUPPOSED TO RIDE A LITTLE ROUGH!!! IT'S SUPPOSED TO GET CRAPPY GAS MILEAGE!!!! BUT IT BETTER HAUL WHATEVER I PUT IN THE BED!!!


I've heard that said a lot, but like anything else, demand mandates what the product will be. No one wants to bounce around in a rough truck that breaks down, is noisy and unrefined--especially those with bad backs. 

By your logic, any pickup is wimpy because a it won't haul what an 18 wheeler will and rides smoother than the big rigs. That is nonsense. Trucks are tools available from 4 wheeler size to oversized load, permit required sized. Buying the correct sized truck for your needs is not wimpy, nor does it make you a soccer mom--it means you are smart. 

Half tons are perfect sized tools for the vast majority of pickup owners--hence their high sales. There's no need to buy a Cat diesel powered semi truck to haul a living room set of furniture.


----------



## Peacock

spacemule;900840Fords have always had really tough engines that are pretty much bullet proof--well said:


> The 4.2, 4.6, 5.4 and 6.8L engines are also less than stellar. Always a bad coil, leaky headgasket or plug blown out.


----------



## sawinredneck

spacemule said:


> I've heard that said a lot, but like anything else, demand mandates what the product will be. No one wants to bounce around in a rough truck that breaks down, is noisy and unrefined--especially those with bad backs.
> 
> By your logic, any pickup is wimpy because a it won't haul what an 18 wheeler will and rides smoother than the big rigs. That is nonsense. Trucks are tools available from 4 wheeler size to oversized load, permit required sized. Buying the correct sized truck for your needs is not wimpy, nor does it make you a soccer mom--it means you are smart.
> 
> Half tons are perfect sized tools for the vast majority of pickup owners--hence their high sales. There's no need to buy a Cat diesel powered semi truck to haul a living room set of furniture.



Too bad you didn't read the rest of my post.


----------



## spacemule

Peacock said:


> The 4.2, 4.6, 5.4 and 6.8L engines are also less than stellar. Always a bad coil, leaky headgasket or plug blown out.



I've ran the 4.9 six cylinder, the 302, 351, and 460 extensively. I was very disappointed when they discontinued these engines--well, except for the I6. I also drove 352, 360 and 400 powered older Fords of my bosses for a few years.They were all good. The 360 was expensive to work on and was broke down a lot, but my coworkers really ragged on that truck. I've not run an overhead cam Ford engine.


----------



## cjk

We got an 02 f150 4x4 to replace my wifes 92 chevy 2wd truck. I didnt test drive any others because my brother worked for Ford. Expensive mistake. 

The f150 was OK, until it started leaking oil on my new garage floor at 12k miles. Warranty or not it was getting traded off. I have had enough of this crap from the big 3. We went and test drove the Tacoma and Tundra and left with a new 03 Tundra wich was highly rated on Consumer Reports at the time. I couldnt be happier with it and figure anyone driving a Ford at the time had never tested the competion. I only have 20k on the truck so far, had the ball joint recall done and thats it. I have heard the new Tundras are not as good as older ones. Most new models have there problems, well see if they get better. 

Ive had vehicles from almost all of them, with plenty of problems, and now we drive a Honda car and a Toyota truck. Both built in USA by the way.


----------



## bcorradi

spacemule said:


> I've ran the 4.9 six cylinder, the 302, 351, and 460 extensively. I was very disappointed when they discontinued these engines--well, except for the I6. I also drove 352, 360 and 400 powered older Fords of my bosses for a few years.They were all good. The 360 was expensive to work on and was broke down a lot, but my coworkers really ragged on that truck. I've not run an overhead cam Ford engine.


The 360 was less than stellar imo, but I dont' have any personal experience with the 352 either so I don't know much about them.


----------



## spacemule

bcorradi said:


> The 360 was less than stellar imo, but I dont' have any personal experience with the 352 either so I don't know much about them.



I understand that the 352 and 390 are the same block with different cranks. They were very tough motors.


----------



## bcorradi

spacemule said:


> I understand that the 352 and 390 are the same block with different cranks. They were very tough motors.


Yeah I just don't have any personal experience with them to comment...I however like the I6...one that you don't seem to care for .


----------



## spacemule

bcorradi said:


> Yeah I just don't have any personal experience with them to comment...I however like the I6...one that you don't seem to care for .



A lot of people liked the I6, and it did have a lot of torque--just wasn't peppy enough for my taste.


----------



## ropensaddle

bcorradi said:


> The 360 was less than stellar imo, but I dont' have any personal experience with the 352 either so I don't know much about them.



They were good just like my 390 in my 65 f 250 4wd tough they were 
in those days and I would by three if they remade them.


----------



## sawinredneck

The 300 I6 truck series motor wasn't made for pep, it was made to out pull the 460!!!!

The 300 car motor, you must not have ever driven one!! They would outrun a 302 tuned right!!!

The 352 left me wanting, seemed to use as much gas, but just a bit short of power. The 390 was bullet proof!! 360 was a good motor as well, none of the 351's did much for me, well there is one, but good luck finding a set of those open port heads!!!!
The 460 was a beast, but the 429 was my hands down favorite!!!! Too bad I was to stupid to own one when I did


----------



## bcorradi

spacemule said:


> A lot of people liked the I6, and it did have a lot of torque--just wasn't peppy enough for my taste.



Yeah I guess the torque and durability are what I liked about them. I'd trade any one of my 5.0's for a I-6 especially the one in my 93. I guess its all dependant on what you use your truck for. If its more or less a tar baby/commuter and seldom pull things the 5.0's are nice.


----------



## spacemule

bcorradi said:


> Yeah I guess the torque and durability are what I liked about them. I'd trade any one of my 5.0's for a I-6 especially the one in my 93. I guess its all dependant on what you use your truck for. If its more or less a tar baby/commuter and seldom pull things the 5.0's are nice.



5.0's pull fine with the right gear ratio.


----------



## bcorradi

spacemule said:


> 5.0's pull fine with the right gear ratio.



By cranking up/down (number/ratio) the gear ratio it will end up a speed demon like the I-6 .


----------



## newby79

I have a 2003 chevy 2500HD with 115,000 miles on it and the only thing I have replaced are the tires. My brother has 120,000 on his 1998 chevy 1500 and has had zero problems. His I believe was the last year for the 350. I know this is just my opinion but I think Chevys are pretty tough. Also I dont get why ford is marketing a "half ton" truck with 3000 lbs of payload. That is not a half ton.


----------

