# How Much Wood Could a Wood Truck Truck?



## 1project2many (Dec 11, 2011)

Lessee... carry the two... move the decimal... add the remainder....

Yep! I figure 2600 lbs on the back of the Yota yesterday. .58 cord of green Sugar Maple and some even heavier waterlogged White Birch as well. I knew it was a load when I had to start off in low range but as I wound my way through the corners she was rockin' and rollin' quite a bit. I knew I was on the high end of things this time.

I'm gonna have to figure out something for the brakes if I keep this up. 
















View attachment 210993
View attachment 210994
View attachment 210995


----------



## Hddnis (Dec 11, 2011)

Might buy some life insurance while you're getting brake parts.




Mr. HE


----------



## 1project2many (Dec 11, 2011)

Was that a joke or a sarcastic reply? I've been building this truck with the expectation that it will carry a ton of wood at a time. Yesterday was a bit more than I expected but 2000# isn't a stretch. Toyota used the same brakes and axle parts on this truck as the single wheel 1 tons they built in the 80's. I built the spring pack so I've got a fair idea what it's capable of. And I was traveling on roads I knew fairly well rather than testing the rig in unknown places. The brakes comment is mainly because I don't like the amount of safety margin I'm working with. It's no worse than many of the older drum brake vehicles on the road and there's some argument that it's better even with the weight. But I'd still like more.


----------



## jtimm (Dec 11, 2011)

Looks like some unused space in the rear? :hmm3grin2orange:


----------



## Ductape (Dec 11, 2011)

Looks like the truck handled the weight OK. Not squatting as bad as I'd expect. 

As far as the brakes go........ I've seen some cars somewhere that use a 'chute to slow down?? :biggrin:


----------



## zogger (Dec 12, 2011)

Nice load. Still would have been better the bulk of it on a trailer. 

An extra axle or 2 or 3 makes a heckuva diff on load moving capability.

Although I agree with you in principle those old toyotas are amazingly tough for a little truck. They were built back when toyota was pulling out the stops to try and garner more market share. Same with their little cars back then, 70s and 80s.


----------



## hoosier daddy (Dec 12, 2011)

View attachment 211085


this is how much wood my wood truck can truck when a wood truck trucks wood...

and yes I have learned to make sure chains to hold sides in get placed back together...it almost looks like the truck is getting ready to blow...


----------



## lone wolf (Dec 12, 2011)

Just drive it slower.


----------



## tooold (Dec 12, 2011)

It looks like the truck is on a 1/2 ton chassis being that it has 6 bolt wheels. If it was a 1 ton, that amount of wood would have been easy for it.


----------



## 1project2many (Dec 12, 2011)

I've got a trailer but there's no way I could have gotten it in and out where this wood is. 

I met a guy in MT that had a Yota used for scrap metal. Neat truck as he lengthened the frame and put a trailer axle right behind the drive axle. Even used a trailer brake controller for the extra axle. Not so good when you have to get out in the woods though.

I was in no hurry to get home but people here tend to get stupid around slow moving equipment. Its just good to have good brakes.


----------



## CTYank (Dec 12, 2011)

As to load capacity, it's not your judgement that counts if some trooper says c'mere.
He/she could easily check what the mfg posted as load capacity. (You use up part of that.) Then said trooper could say "come with me to the nearest scale." Like they do with the big-uns.
Re trailer: Toyota also rates combined gross weight. You might want to know what those limits are.
Some of those mountain grades in NH will put it to the test


----------



## 4xrpm4x (Dec 12, 2011)

1project2many said:


> Its just good to have good brakes.


Deffinatly, Your Breaks can never be too good. the easiest way to up grade your breaks would be to instal some drilled and slotted rotors, along with a high performance pad on the front and go from there. The holes and slots help disapate the gasses, dust and moisture between the pads and rotores and the hi-pro pads offer greater friction and less breake fade with a longer lasting pad (I've had good reasults from EBC pads). Stainless steal braided lines are another way to improve breaking. You might not notice the difference with them alone, but the rubber hoses strech and swell when the breake is applied. Taking away from your caliper pressure. 

Since all the weight will be in the back, that puts more stress on your rear breaks.(under normal surcumstances your front breaks do 75% of the work) I'm not a toy guy so I'm not sure what you have to work with back there, but I'm assuming that you have rear drums, in witch case the best solution would be to do a rear disk conversion (***not the most cost effective way***).

There are lots of ways to up grade breaks, some are better then others. Some arnt worth the money. You can do piston upgrades, larger calipers from a doner truck, break boosters and the list goes on. 

Like I said I'm not to famillure with toyotas, so I'm not sure of all your options. Check out some Toyota offroad forums. I'm sure there will be tones of people with oversized tires that had to upgrade their brakes to get ther rigs to stop. 

Personally I would start with rotors and pads, maybe some Stainless steal braided lines if your budget allows it. See where that gets you, and decide how much more stopping you need.


----------



## EXCALIBER (Dec 12, 2011)

First off I would be less worried about your axles than I would your frame. Toy's have a weak frame and if you keep loading it that way soon it will bend usually right behind the cab. Second it sounds like your trying to use mighty mouse where hulk is needed. Toys are good for many things but carrying large loads is not one of them, they lack the power, frame, drive train, brakes, ect. It would be easier to just buy a different truck then to rebuild a toy to be a full-size truck. 

As far as brakes go drum brakes are actually more efficient than disc brakes although they require more tinkering to keep them in proper working order and adjusted properly. Drum breaks use a compound leverage to stop the truck, not just the pressure on brake piston. Drum breaks also last about 3 times longer than the disc brakes will. The only problem with drum breaks is you have to keep them adjusted, and they are not as good at wet braking as slotted and drilled rotors are. Look underneath a semi, farm truck, ect all drum brakes and they work great. 

Haul smaller loads and the truck will last very well, keep overworking it and soon the truck will be broke or worse. If you had to use low range to move then it was overloaded. As my old shop teacher said use the right tool for the right job. Nice truck just smaller loads.


----------



## 4xrpm4x (Dec 12, 2011)

If he can't get his trailer into where he gets his wood, it's offroad. If your offroad you want disks. Semi's rearly leave the highway. And I haven't seen To many farm trucks with properly working breaks. Not around here anyways.

Edit: I do agree about the truck being overloaded. But I'm not one to listen to someone telling me that all the work I've put into my truck has been for nothing, and I should sell it for a 1ton. So I wouldn't suggest it to anyone. I was just trying to help with the problem at hand. For now, He needs better breaks


----------



## tooold (Dec 12, 2011)

Most medium duty trucks now come with disk brakes. One big problem with drums is brake fade. I didn't get it the first time I looked at the truck that it was a toy. Yeah, if your hauling wood like that, get a real truck.


----------



## EXCALIBER (Dec 12, 2011)

True most trucks are going to disc brakes all the way around but not for the right reasons. Look at the full size trucks running around anymore, you will see they are almost empty, no cargo or load. People buy them just to drive around town and because they "need 4wd". In reality if they would learn how to drive the vehicle instead of relying on 4wd to save them they would be better off. The old trucks were used as trucks, hauling heavy loads, towing, offroading on the ranch, hunting you name it. Trucks made today are designed for the highway not work. As far as brake fad never had any problem with drum brakes fading, unless you just do not know how to drive and overheat the brakes. This is usually a problem on the road, and not offroading, as offroading you hardly ever touch the brakes except to completely stop. If your not driving it right the brakes will overheat and fade no matter what kind of brakes you put on the vehicle. There is also a great weight reduction on going from drum brakes to disc brakes so your MPG will increase, a plus for a truck company trying to sell trucks.


----------



## Dalmatian90 (Dec 12, 2011)

> Look at the full size trucks running around anymore, you will see they are almost empty, no cargo or load. People buy them just to drive around town and because they "need 4wd".



/rant start 

I've started to look at buying a used F-250 next year -- something in decent shape (i.e. something some old almost-retired fart pulled their camper around with) so it can be my "nice" car in lieu of my beat-to-pieces Ranger with 225,000 miles on it. But that I can mount a good plow to, get a dump trailer to support some upcoming projects around my property, and eventually when the Ranger is beyond the cost of repairs become my primary woods truck.

The height of the beds on the F-250s and F-350s at least since the mid-90s is way, way too high IMHO. I just cringed Sunday when I was kicking the tires of a F-350 on a local dealers lot, who the heck wants to throw firewood into something that high? But I need something better mechanically and nicer interior then a 30 y/o truck for the once a week 100 mile round trip I do for work, as well as occasional business and social trips.

And it's NOT me. It's the trucks. 

I just measured my Ranger and it sits empty at 29.5" load height (tailgate height). 

Here's the plate off a 5/4 ton CUCV -- I can't tell if 30.5" is supposed to be the tailgate, or the tailgate is even lower then that when down...but it's in the same vicinty as my Ranger.






The current F-250 lists a 36" load height, and the F-350 comes in at 38"...I'll take a tape measure with me next time I go tire kicking, otherwise I'd only believe that load height if it's for a bed filled with freshly cut oak up to the roof top 

I just can't figure out for the average truck that is supposed to work truck why they make them so back-breakingly high -- you can't reach over the side rails easily, you can't throw stuff in them at a comfortable height, you can't use the tailgate as a work bench at or just turn around and hop up on as a seat easily. I have no clue how you're supposed to use a toolbox mounted on one of these trucks unless you first open the tailgate and pull out a step ladder you carry around. 

I don't even see how it meaningfully increases ground clearance given the size tires they ship with.

I don't know if it's just looks or if it's for accommodating soft springs for a better ride, but they sure as heck aren't designed for someone who wants to use a pickup truck as a pickup truck.

/rant over


----------



## tooold (Dec 12, 2011)

I know! Why are they making them sit so tall? They make me feel short! I have a Ranger long box for road trips and a modified Jeep CJ7 with a trailer for going off road. If I need to I can haul the Kubota RTV there and haul wood out with that.


----------



## ratso (Dec 12, 2011)

*Timbrens*

I put timbrens on my Toyota pickup and the body role was eliminated .The ride is the same until you load the bed with wood.


----------



## Hddnis (Dec 12, 2011)

1project2many said:


> Was that a joke or a sarcastic reply? I've been building this truck with the expectation that it will carry a ton of wood at a time. Yesterday was a bit more than I expected but 2000# isn't a stretch. Toyota used the same brakes and axle parts on this truck as the single wheel 1 tons they built in the 80's. I built the spring pack so I've got a fair idea what it's capable of. And I was traveling on roads I knew fairly well rather than testing the rig in unknown places. The brakes comment is mainly because I don't like the amount of safety margin I'm working with. It's no worse than many of the older drum brake vehicles on the road and there's some argument that it's better even with the weight. But I'd still like more.





Not a joke or sarcastic. 





Mr. HE


----------



## chopperfreak2k1 (Dec 13, 2011)

Dalmatian90 said:


> The height of the beds on the F-250s and F-350s at least since the mid-90s is way, way too high IMHO. I just cringed Sunday when I was kicking the tires of a F-350 on a local dealers lot, who the heck wants to throw firewood into something that high? But I need something better mechanically and nicer interior then a 30 y/o truck for the once a week 100 mile round trip I do for work, as well as occasional business and social trips.
> 
> I just can't figure out for the average truck that is supposed to work truck why they make them so back-breakingly high -- you can't reach over the side rails easily, you can't throw stuff in them at a comfortable height, you can't use the tailgate as a work bench at or just turn around and hop up on as a seat easily. I have no clue how you're supposed to use a toolbox mounted on one of these trucks unless you first open the tailgate and pull out a step ladder you carry around.



thank you! i've been saying this for years. and it's not just ford, it's all of them. trucks aren't trucks any more, they're glorified cars with beds! 70's and 80's chevy's that's what i drive.

1P2M- if your set on keeping the 'yota, i'd box the frame (learn how on the off road forums like pirate) and beef up the brakes like has been mentioned, and do something about the body roll too. i'm not a 'yota guy but i am a hardcore off road guy and i have never heard 'yota's have weak drivetrains, i've only heard the opposite. good lookin' truck brother!


----------



## 1project2many (Dec 13, 2011)

Folks, thanks for the suggestions. It's kinda good to see so many people recommending improving the truck or even better, replacing it. It's good sound advice, especially when offered to someone who may not understand what that Toy is being asked to do.

Begin commentary
I was unhappy when GM released the '88 C/K series truck. Felt like a car to drive. But they'd targeted a market willing to spend money. Current trend is driven by styling and you can blame the Dodge trucks for that. 92, 93 when the first Ram with the big grill came out, Ford and GM said "yadda yadda our styling research indicates this will not be popular with consumers." 2-3 years later after Dodge sales had increased every year, copycat Ford started releasing Big Grills. Then Chevy did their own version. Now, styling seems bent on "bigger grille!" Even vans are released in Big Grille models. Looks ridiculous on our school buses and old people shuttle vans. And you know, I think part of the reason the truck is so high is they've gotten the grilles so dang big they needed to "upsize" the proportions of the truck to make it work. Like making the sandwich and fries double size to match the already too big soft drink. Sales departments at the light duty truck makers know their primary sales of work trucks go to small business owners who are realizing they need something larger than the family car to get jobs done for the business. Yet most of the profit in selling trucks comes from people buying them for fun and personal reasons.
End commentary

Larger trucks cost more to own. Most of the time this truck travels the highway empty or near empty. I use it on my 80 mile daily round trip to work, and I use it to go to visit friends and family hundreds of miles away. The only job it does regularly hauling substantial weight is hauling firewood. This last trip was a bit of a test. I don't plan on carrying that much weight all the time although I'm making sure it's capable of a ton safely. Yes, running over manufacturer's rating is illegal. So is driving 5-10 over the limit on the highway, putting gasoline into an unmarked container, and standing on milk crates. And if I get fined or worse for doing any of these things then the only person I have to blame is myself.

(more to follow)


----------



## beerman6 (Dec 13, 2011)

lol...I just went and measured my 2001 3/4 ton 4wd Ram.Stock the slightly bent tailgate sits right at 36" top rail is at 57"

I can say without a doubt that it dont sit this high to give it a softer spring,car like ride,this thing empty rides like a truck and it also gets used like it should...


----------



## an?qus (Dec 13, 2011)

chopperfreak2k1 said:


> thank you! i've been saying this for years. and it's not just ford, it's all of them. trucks aren't trucks any more, they're glorified cars with beds! ...



Don't you wonder?? My theory is this: If you're a guy and you own a truck today, and you're not an outdoors-man or a contractor, you only own it because you're a guy and your supposed to own a truck. Heck, you can barely make a dump run in these trucks these days...but they love them. Go figure!


----------



## greendohn (Dec 13, 2011)

*Flog it,,beat it with a whip,,it'll be all rite,,*

my 1/2 ton, 96 dog,,i mean dodge 4x4 was bought for wood haulin'. run it over the scales at the gravel yard and had a lil'over 3800 lbs. on it !! the stearing was feeling a lil' lite!! but, slow-steady acceleration and long slow stopping,,lots of coasting,, all back roads, occasionally feelin' the bump stops,,i got 'er home okay. I also haul fire wood that way...loaded to or near the bump stops.."GIT 'ER DONE  and GIT IT HOME !!


----------



## zogger (Dec 13, 2011)

*small trucks*



1project2many said:


> Folks, thanks for the suggestions. It's kinda good to see so many people recommending improving the truck or even better, replacing it. It's good sound advice, especially when offered to someone who may not understand what that Toy is being asked to do.
> 
> Begin commentary
> I was unhappy when GM released the '88 C/K series truck. Felt like a car to drive. But they'd targeted a market willing to spend money. Current trend is driven by styling and you can blame the Dodge trucks for that. 92, 93 when the first Ram with the big grill came out, Ford and GM said "yadda yadda our styling research indicates this will not be popular with consumers." 2-3 years later after Dodge sales had increased every year, copycat Ford started releasing Big Grills. Then Chevy did their own version. Now, styling seems bent on "bigger grille!" Even vans are released in Big Grille models. Looks ridiculous on our school buses and old people shuttle vans. And you know, I think part of the reason the truck is so high is they've gotten the grilles so dang big they needed to "upsize" the proportions of the truck to make it work. Like making the sandwich and fries double size to match the already too big soft drink. Sales departments at the light duty truck makers know their primary sales of work trucks go to small business owners who are realizing they need something larger than the family car to get jobs done for the business. Yet most of the profit in selling trucks comes from people buying them for fun and personal reasons.
> ...



That's exactly what my half ton datsun is for. It's a light duty truck that gets good enough mileage to qualify as a commuter car as well, if needed (although I don't commute). I just think of it as a stout built full frame car with a really really large trunk that is easy to load or unload. It is for going to town in, mostly, although in decent weather when I can drive it in the fields I use it there for work on the farm.

40 MPG with the ability to haul half a ton or tow a small trailer ain't nuthin to sneeze at.

I see guys driving around huge standard sized pickups empty all the time, they are using them like cars. Back when I lived in Atlanta and was in traffic jams all I could see was every other vehicle really looked like a waste of fuel and a waste of monthly high payments. Either a giant pickup empty or giant SUV empty, just for some office job or something.

My boss is more than wealthy enough to drive any brand new big pickup they offer, with all the bells and whistles. But he doesn't, his daily driver is a small ford ranger. I asked him about that, he said (paraphrased) WTH do I need to drive around in a monster truck for? This does everything I need all the time for going to the office or to tractor supply or whatever, and gets fair mileage. 

Any serious work, he switches trucks, his next *smallest* one is an f450 with a flatbed dump.


----------



## Diesel nut (Dec 13, 2011)

It's time for a tag axle or just go all out and make it a twin screw!


----------



## cheeves (Dec 13, 2011)

zogger said:


> Nice load. Still would have been better the bulk of it on a trailer.
> 
> An extra axle or 2 or 3 makes a heckuva diff on load moving capability.
> 
> Although I agree with you in principle those old toyotas are amazingly tough for a little truck. They were built back when toyota was pulling out the stops to try and garner more market share. Same with their little cars back then, 70s and 80s.


We've had 3 Toyota Tacomas that we've used for getting firewood. After I finish this I'm going to use the wifes 2002 Tacoma to go and get a load of dead standing oak. Yes they are small have smaller axles, frames, ect. but they get the job done. Around here it's getting harder and harder to get wood. The Tacomas go down the trails that the dirt bikes have made. They are ideal for this area. And with my back after I fill the Tacoma I'm done anyway. But I also have the '94 Chevy 4x4, 6 cylinder 5 speed, which has a broken leaf spring right now. So if you have something that will get firewood, you're in better shape that if you don't. Heck I've even gotten wood in a VW before!! :msp_biggrin:


----------



## slowp (Dec 13, 2011)

It isn't always a good thing to make a pickup ride "like a truck". I like the way Chevys ride. They are comfy, like a car. Bump around on woods roads for hours, and you'll appreciate that. Go to work with sore ribs or a tweaked back, and the smoother the ride, the better. Because a pickup rides nicely, does not mean that it is confined to the highway and city. 

I just replaced my Subaru with a Ranger. I wanted a Toyota, but the price difference would buy a lot of gas.
I like the ride of the Chevys, but their Colorado 3x4 does not have enough clearance. 

I am one of those people "who needs a four wheel drive." It saves me from chaining up to get up my hill to my house. It saves me from chaining up when driving over the pass. I also wanted higher clearance than the Subaru. There are large waterbars that must be negotiated to get up to huckleberry patches. 

I now have a Ford and a two wheel drive Chevy pickup. The Chevy gets 27 to 29 mpg. It'll be the car. 
View attachment 211295


----------



## an?qus (Dec 13, 2011)

cheeves said:


> We've had 3 Toyota Tacomas that we've used for getting firewood. After I finish this I'm going to use the wifes 2002 Tacoma to go and get a load of dead standing oak. Yes they are small have smaller axles, frames, ect. but they get the job done. Around here it's getting harder and harder to get wood. The Tacomas go down the trails that the dirt bikes have made. They are ideal for this area. And with my back after I fill the Tacoma I'm done anyway. But I also have the '94 Chevy 4x4, 6 cylinder 5 speed, which has a broken leaf spring right now. So if you have something that will get firewood, you're in better shape that if you don't. Heck I've even gotten wood in a VW before!! :msp_biggrin:



I used to walk 5 miles up a hill both ways with a hatchet and a burlap bag!


----------



## tooold (Dec 13, 2011)

I have always wondered about this load carring wheel assy that fits into a receiver hitch. My wimpy Ranger really sags in the back and drags my rear mud flaps when I have a heavy load. I put coil over shocks on a s-10 once and it made it ride super stiff. This wheel could be used only when needed.

"Stinger Hitch Helper, Hell-Ya Hitch Helper to stablize your heavy loads and trailers. Hitch Helper, Truck and SUV load solution for heavy payloads or towing. Fast and easy solution for horse trailers, RV trailers, slide in campers, car trailers, sli


----------



## mitch95100 (Dec 13, 2011)

stick your foot out to stop...
or throw out an anchor


----------



## zogger (Dec 13, 2011)

tooold said:


> I have always wondered about this load carring wheel assy that fits into a receiver hitch. My wimpy Ranger really sags in the back and drags my rear mud flaps when I have a heavy load. I put coil over shocks on a s-10 once and it made it ride super stiff. This wheel could be used only when needed.
> 
> "Stinger Hitch Helper, Hell-Ya Hitch Helper to stablize your heavy loads and trailers. Hitch Helper, Truck and SUV load solution for heavy payloads or towing. Fast and easy solution for horse trailers, RV trailers, slide in campers, car trailers, sli



That is a slick idea!


----------



## stihlrookie (Dec 13, 2011)

Not to hijack but here are my two. Tacoma has a bit over 1/2 cord and the longbed is hauling a bit over 1/3 cord. The little one is supposed to be a box frame but with all the cancer under there it is a C frame. I know I am pushing my luck with that one. I love my smaller trucks, I can get to alot of places the big guys can't, I can park along side most forest roads with room for a fullsize to get by. Has been said already, but my back can only handle 1/2 cord at a time so it works for me. 

View attachment 211340
View attachment 211342


OP, use what you got, improve if you can, keep up the good work. Stay safe.


----------



## tbow388 (Dec 13, 2011)

*My Wood Truck*

My wood truck trucks this much.







:msp_scared::msp_scared:


----------



## tbow388 (Dec 13, 2011)

*Mud Flaps*



tbow388 said:


> My wood truck trucks this much.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




The mud flaps are still a inch off the ground so I think I'm still okay.


----------



## 1project2many (Dec 13, 2011)

Thanks for the pics, guys. Stihlrookie, that longbed truck looks beautiful compared to what's in this area.

I think the suggestion to box the frame under the cab is a great one. I'll have to leave access for cleaning and drain holes because salt and mud have a habit of building up and doing a lot of damage before being caught. Rear disc conversions are nice but always, always consider the tradeoffs. Few rear disc setups have park brakes of substantial size. Either they use a small drum and "make-believe" shoes inside the rotor or they use a mechanical linkage inside the caliper. I like to have plenty of park brake in a truck with manual trans so I'm likely to stick with my drums. After getting quality frictions and resurfacing / replacing the drums and rotors there aren't a lot of realistic inexpensive brake upgrades for these trucks. I'm thinking about adding a driveshaft brake where the carrier bearing hangs. I could actuate it off the brake hydraulic system using a height sensing proportioning valve so the only time it's active is when loaded. But the "cleanest" and least intensive install would be to use an electric trailer brake and controller so it can be completely switched off when not needed. I have a spare brake controller here, and I can get a complete new brake assembly for under $65. 

Excalibur, there's more to this truck than meets the eye. The reason I start in low range when the weight's on is threefold. First, Toyota never saw fit to use a deep 1st gear ratio in the 22RE 5 speed transmissions so I don't have that creeper gear many older trucks have. And I've switched from factory 4.10s to 3.90s for lower rpm on the highway so I've lost some mechanical advantage. Finally, I happened to choose a clutch that has a bunch of grip but very little slip. I start in low range and double clutch to high rather than beat the snot out of the driveline trying to slip the clutch in high. As far as the engine is concerned there's plenty of power available for what I do. Between the high torque cam and the quick mid range onset of boost it's got a decent powerband. I keep threatening to swap to a smaller turbo for more low rpm torque but this one is plenty good provided I hold the gears and don't drive it like a diesel. Plus I loooove hearing the turbine wind down when I shut the engine off and I'd lose that if I traded this turbo for my smaller one. This truck isn't Mighty Mouse doing Hulk's job. It's a scrench replacing multiple tools.

Now if anyone wants to talk about overloaded trucks, I've got a few stories from the years I worked on trucks during sugarbeet harvest. This little load of wood would make those beet farmers howl with laughter.


----------



## rwoods (Dec 13, 2011)

Dalmatian90 said:


> /rant start
> 
> I've started to look at buying a used F-250 next year -- something in decent shape (i.e. something some old almost-retired fart pulled their camper around with) so it can be my "nice" car in lieu of my beat-to-pieces Ranger with 225,000 miles on it. But that I can mount a good plow to, get a dump trailer to support some upcoming projects around my property, and eventually when the Ranger is beyond the cost of repairs become my primary woods truck.
> 
> ...



I got to ask why your CUCV isn't your primary wood truck? Ron


----------



## Dalmatian90 (Dec 13, 2011)

rwoods said:


> I got to ask why your CUCV isn't your primary wood truck? Ron



Don't own one.


----------



## EXCALIBER (Dec 15, 2011)

Well I was going to leave well enough alone but just couldn't. First how is a smaller pickup like an s-10, ranger, taco, ect cheaper to operate or own than a larger fullsize pickup?:msp_confused:Average mpg on the smaller trucks running empty is around 18-20, average mpg on a fullsize truck is, yep, 18-20 mpg, and all the while you are carrying double the load or more of the smaller trucks. Now add weight and the smaller pickups do not have the torque/HP to pull a good full load so you are overworking the engine and your mileage will suffer greatly for it. Fuel/gas is your biggest expense anymore on running a pickup. Heck my old 1 ton chevy crew cab with a 6.2 Detroit gets 21 running down the highway, a little less loaded like 16-18. Now for getting a small truck down dirt bike trails it is never going to happen. Dirt bikes are less than 2 ft wide, 4 wheelers are about less than 4 ft wide, a small truck is over 6 feet wide? So how do you get through two trees/rocks opposite of each other that are 4 ft apart with a six foot wide vehicle? Small trucks have their place and are easier to get around in, sure, but lets keep it real. I have never seen a truck of any kind make or model that would get 40 mpg down the highway, or 27-29mpg for that matter, unless you guys mounted a fifthwheel hitch in the bed with a sailing mast on it!!LOL Nor have I seen a six ft wide vehicle morph into a two foot wide vehicle and run on two tires sounds like Hollywood to me.


----------



## Chainsaw_Maniac (Dec 15, 2011)

This reminds me of the time I sold a full cord of wood to a guy and he wanted to put it all in his half ton. He had a little kid with him, and i remeber the kid saying something like "mommy is going to be mad. Isn't this how you wrecked our last truck." :biggrin:


----------



## tooold (Dec 15, 2011)

Everytime I fill my tank, I record the miles and gallons. My 2005 Ranger with 4cyl, 5sp stick, and no A/C averaged 27mpg in the summer and 25 in the winter. My 2007 Ranger long box, 4cyl, 5sp auto, with A/C is averaging 25mpg summer and 23 winter. Most of my trips are in the 10 mile range. My 1980 Jeep CJ7 with a chevy 300hp v8 gets about 13mpg.


----------



## EXCALIBER (Dec 15, 2011)

tooold you must drive your truck very easy considering only a ten mile at a time drive. Not doubting you just saying you must drive very easy to what most average people drive. That 05 ranger is rated to get 21 in town driving, 27 on the highway, and 23 combined. The 07 is rated at 19 city, 21 combined, 24 highway. My point way this: your 05 ranger has a payload of 1261 lbs, so even if you only had to go 10 miles to get your wood, and lets say you got the same mileage loaded as unloaded (which will not happen) then to move 7215 lbs of wood you would have to make 6 full round trips to haul all the wood. So 10 miles each way, 20 miles round trip, 20x6 trips=120 miles now divide by 27 mpg, and you get 4.45 gallons of fuel used. Lets just say 4$ per gallon so 17.80$ in fuel to haul that wood. Now one trip with a 1 ton Chevrolet at 20 mpg, going 20 miles, 20/20 so 1 gal fuel used, cost is $4 bucks. 17.80/4=4.45 times more cost. So to haul the same amount of wood with it would cost you almost 5 times more in fuel, and lets keep in mind this is close, only ten miles away. The further to go get the wood the more a larger truck will save you. My other question is what mileage do you get with 1261lbs of wood in the bed driving down the highway at 75-80mph? Around town? That same small engine that makes it possible to get such good mileage empty will work against you when you have to use that pickup as a pickup, as it will have to be run redline just to move the load. Small trucks have many useful uses, hauling the garbage to the dump, hauling some furniture, ect but hauling wood is not one of them. In most cases it would be more cost effective to just buy a used beat up good running 1 ton truck to haul the wood.


----------



## Lumberjack2277 (Dec 15, 2011)

Man, I think your doing great! Just stay safe, take the hills easy, and you'll be fine. There will always be the "Engineers" telling you the right and wrong ways.... but you just make it work for you. Now this makes me want to load down MY GMC 7000 24' Jerdan (10-ton Capacity) and take some pics! But... i've never had to load it with that much firewood lol!! I could get at LEAST 7 cords of wood on it... nicely split and delivered! (We'll be arguing that next.... lol) :msp_thumbup:


----------



## tooold (Dec 15, 2011)

EX...I will admit that my truck spends more time empty than full. I'm not in business of selling wood, just cutting what I need. I manage to use less than 100 gal of propane a year so that will give you something to punch into your calculator. My truck is what it is and I get good mileage doing what I do. I could let my ego get the best of me and I could write a check for a new Chevy with a Duramax diesel so I can haul wood 10 days out of the year. If I was hauling wood every week, I would buy one today. Instead, I pull a tandem trailer with my jeep and haul more than your truck. For large trees I even haul my tractor loader to the site. No, I don't drive 75 or 80mph with a full load of wood, do you? Maybe you should be using your calculator to figure stopping distances and attorney fees instead of worrying if someone else is happy with their truck choice.


----------



## slowp (Dec 15, 2011)

My 4 banger Chevy Colorado gets 27 mpg average. One trip to town--60 miles, I got 29. I must've had a tailwind. I pull a little trailer and get about 25 if I keep the speed down. Even without a trailer, if I drive 70mph, the gas consumption increases. It's a 5 speed manual transmission. 

The Ranger I got gets much worse gas mileage and it is equal to a full size truck. However, it seems that the little pickups get around better than full size, and the purchase price was much less. I can buy a lot of gas for that price difference. It is also easier to park.


----------



## tooold (Dec 16, 2011)

If I ever need big equipment, I have friends very near by that help me out. The one has a loader with a 5 yard bucket, and that's not the big stuff. He uses his quad axle dump trucks to haul wood, some of the wood I helped cut for him. If he needs to haul whole trees he uses his dump semi trucks. So, all I do is do some work for him and he helps me out when I'm in need of BIG stuff. Then I use that Ranger of mine to get the beer! he he


----------



## EXCALIBER (Dec 16, 2011)

tooold I think you got me all wrong-I am not trying to say your truck is not the best for what you are doing, or that it doesn't work for you, that's great if it does. Like I said small trucks have a place. What I am worried about is someone with a toy that is factory rated for 1600 lbs of payload loading 2800 lbs in back of it then trying to soup it up to carry that weight safely. You mentioned stopping distance, while yes more weight in a truck takes longer to stop than an empty one usually, but a truck designed to carry 7000+ lbs of payload is perfectly safe doing highway speeds, everything on the truck is designed to work within those parameters. Now take the same truck and overload it as the op is doing as see what happens. Extreme body roll, massive braking distance, not enough power to safely pull the load or get it started, ect. Not trying to rain on anyone's parade or put any truck down, just asking, would you feel safe with a ranger/toy rated to haul a certain amount of weight then doubling that and have them drive by your family in a car headed the other way? Of course not. 
Lumberjack2277 Please post a pick of your GMC 7000 up in the mountains as the op said he uses his toy for, off road tree getting. I am not an engineer but didn't think they did well off road???


----------



## Diesel nut (Dec 16, 2011)

I wonder how many cords this would haul?


----------



## EXCALIBER (Dec 16, 2011)

A lot but you are not going very far from a paved road either and won't even make it to where the wood is at in the mountains the op was referring too. Nice hauler though


----------



## morewood (Dec 16, 2011)

I must say this thread is interesting. I agree with Ex on his observations. I bought a new Nissan Titan when they came out. Turns out with 3-4 people, camping gear, and the tongue weight of a boat trailer you are awfully close or over the load rating for the vehicle. I ended up trading for a 2001 Dodge 2500 4x4, diesel fo course. Most half ton trucks aren't rated much if any higher than your midsize ones. They do proclaim high towing loads though. My truck is modified. It gets up to 22.9 mpg(best highway mpg to date). It averages 19-20. The brakes are equal to what came on the 1 tons of the day. I say all this to say, if you can, get the right tool to do the job. If the yota works, great, but that doesn't necessarily make it safe. I see tail draggers loaded with wood, tires balloned out, saws about to fall out rolling around here all the time. Doesn't make me feel safe riding around with the wife and son. 

Shea

BTW--Not big on calling anybody out, but when I see a truck, ANY truck that gets 40mpg, which is just slightly less than we get in our Jetta TDI, it will be the first.


----------



## zogger (Dec 16, 2011)

EXCALIBER said:


> Well I was going to leave well enough alone but just couldn't. First how is a smaller pickup like an s-10, ranger, taco, ect cheaper to operate or own than a larger fullsize pickup?:msp_confused:Average mpg on the smaller trucks running empty is around 18-20, average mpg on a fullsize truck is, yep, 18-20 mpg, and all the while you are carrying double the load or more of the smaller trucks. Now add weight and the smaller pickups do not have the torque/HP to pull a good full load so you are overworking the engine and your mileage will suffer greatly for it. Fuel/gas is your biggest expense anymore on running a pickup. Heck my old 1 ton chevy crew cab with a 6.2 Detroit gets 21 running down the highway, a little less loaded like 16-18. Now for getting a small truck down dirt bike trails it is never going to happen. Dirt bikes are less than 2 ft wide, 4 wheelers are about less than 4 ft wide, a small truck is over 6 feet wide? So how do you get through two trees/rocks opposite of each other that are 4 ft apart with a six foot wide vehicle? Small trucks have their place and are easier to get around in, sure, but lets keep it real. I have never seen a truck of any kind make or model that would get 40 mpg down the highway, or 27-29mpg for that matter, unless you guys mounted a fifthwheel hitch in the bed with a sailing mast on it!!LOL Nor have I seen a six ft wide vehicle morph into a two foot wide vehicle and run on two tires sounds like Hollywood to me.



--mine hits at 40 on any flat road where I can safely cruise just touching fifth gear, and not loaded heavy. Not lugging it, but not pushing it either, right at that sweet spot. 4 cylinder diesel, it is a datsun industrial forklift engine actually. I typically get around 30 or better going to town and back on slower twisty roads where I go in third or fourth. 

With that said, I ain't hauling no huge mass quantities of wood or weight in it. I have hauled like riding mowers, fridges, heaped up crates of vegetables back when I had a large backyard chicken flock and was scrounging food for them, etc. Coupla loads of scrap metal from the tornado damage. I did firewood two times in it, cutting alongside the road, but I don't think I had over around 800 lbs or so of wood in it. It is rated half ton, real old, springs sorta shot, I added half leaf helper springs to it this past spring.

VW is still the mileage king on light duty trucks, any road legal trucks sold in the US anyway, no idea on overseas of course.. They had a rabbit diesel pickup that would hit around 60 MPG and they are now starting to be sought after vehicles for restoration because of that fact. Real light duty, but technically a pickup. Full time front wheel drive at that. They are actually built pretty good, what killed off most of them is people want hotrods that will go over 100 mph, even in a truck, and the picky bosch fuel injection systems which used to croak easy if the filters weren't changed often. When I worked on a VW lot, we had a line of them out back all croaked from the same reason, with replacement costs even back then falling into the "are you freeking kidding me"? range. The vast majority of them got scrapped long ago, but you can still find them and they get decent prices for runners or near runners.

Anyway, on my datsun, it is annoying, they made a good kingcab 4wd they sold, still a lot out there, but the diesel option wasn't available in the US. And it is some major hoop jumping to convert one, more than I want to do, I have looked into it. Either conversion, the diesel into a factory 4wd, or the 4wd stuff into the factory 2wd diesel like I have. Ain't worth the hassle, to me anyway, looked into it a bunch, It is doable, but heck, building a vehicle totally from scratch is doable as well. got no huge interest in that myself. I have quite enough mechanical work I have to do already.

So, mine is limited to on hard surfaces only. That's why I got my chev 4wd with the 6.2 detroit diesel (still in project truck status).

I'd willingly give up 10 MPG with the datsun if it was 4wd and much better ground clearance and so on, all the heavier dutier stuff you get with 4wd. But I just ain't gonna do all the mods necessary, it's silly really, not cost effective at all unless you get all the parts for free and like dorking around with custom building as a hobby.

80s Toyota had a diesel 4wd, but sorta rare to find them as well. I think..hmmm..Isuzu from that era (mid 80s, the ultimate in good mileage years for anything in the US) is probably the best of all the worlds, 4wd, heavy duty built for a small truck, good mileage diesel built right. Again, sorta rare now but you can find them. Toyota hilux good too, most sold overseas, not available in US in any big numbers I think. 

With all that said, I agree with you in principle on much bigger, eat the fuel, move mass quantities once and be done with it. Just sometimes people can only afford what they got, and need the truck for normal commuting and etc as well, so a compromise is needed.

On this farm we actually have the only 4wd vehicles, neither is running right now, but still..guys here run 2wd, ANYTHING off road is done with a tractor. 

The trucks just get stuck constantly and some of them require a crawler to get them out. If it has rained at all lately and you take a truck out, it'll get stuck, sure as snot, so we just don't do it or try it. Even the dang litter spreader, a huge truck designed to travel the fields, gets stuck because it has road wheels on it and not the proper huge single floater tires like it should have. That thing just sucks to get it out when it gets stuck, tell ya whut...

When I get my chev 4wd running well, I am not taking that thing out until I get proper real mudders, either, because I just ain't that dumb.


----------



## cheeves (Dec 16, 2011)

EXCALIBER said:


> Well I was going to leave well enough alone but just couldn't. First how is a smaller pickup like an s-10, ranger, taco, ect cheaper to operate or own than a larger fullsize pickup?:msp_confused:Average mpg on the smaller trucks running empty is around 18-20, average mpg on a fullsize truck is, yep, 18-20 mpg, and all the while you are carrying double the load or more of the smaller trucks. Now add weight and the smaller pickups do not have the torque/HP to pull a good full load so you are overworking the engine and your mileage will suffer greatly for it. Fuel/gas is your biggest expense anymore on running a pickup. Heck my old 1 ton chevy crew cab with a 6.2 Detroit gets 21 running down the highway, a little less loaded like 16-18. Now for getting a small truck down dirt bike trails it is never going to happen. Dirt bikes are less than 2 ft wide, 4 wheelers are about less than 4 ft wide, a small truck is over 6 feet wide? So how do you get through two trees/rocks opposite of each other that are 4 ft apart with a six foot wide vehicle? Small trucks have their place and are easier to get around in, sure, but lets keep it real. I have never seen a truck of any kind make or model that would get 40 mpg down the highway, or 27-29mpg for that matter, unless you guys mounted a fifthwheel hitch in the bed with a sailing mast on it!!LOL Nor have I seen a six ft wide vehicle morph into a two foot wide vehicle and run on two tires sounds like Hollywood to me.


I respect you brother, but with the little truck thing you're a little off. First off the best place I go I can't get my Chevy in there. Secondly after 3 Tacomas and I can't remember how many other trucks of various sizes getting wood the size difference IMHO is negligable. I can get a load with my brothers full size Tundra come home and dump it. Do the same with my 2002 Tacoma and you can hardly tell the difference. Same thing with my Chevy. My Tacoma gets better mileage than his Tundra too, and my Chevy. Again with all due respect!


----------



## Dalmatian90 (Dec 16, 2011)

> I can get a load with my brothers full size Tundra come home and dump it. Do the same with my 2002 Tacoma and you can hardly tell the difference.



You're comparing Florida Oranges with California Oranges there...they're both essentially half-ton pickups, ones just wider. They'll both carry about 1/3rd of a cord. Thrown, stacked, whatever doesn't matter because you run out of springs. One reason I only owned an F-150 for a couple years is I quickly realized that with no need to carry extra passengers with me it was no more useful then a Ranger, just a bigger pain when I drove into the city daily for where I worked at the time.

Back of my mind, when you look at payload capacity and all, you need a 3/4 ton pickup for 3/4 cord load (stacked), and a 1 ton with an 8' bed if you want to stack and haul a cord. And both of those taking the time to stack the wood for maximum capacity.

It's an Apples-and-Oranges when you step up from the compact/mid-size/half ton class trucks to the 3/4 and 1 ton trucks.


----------



## EXCALIBER (Dec 16, 2011)

Well I would say if you only went by the specs both payloads would end up the about the same. However in the real world if you put 1600 lbs of weight in back of a Tacoma it will be sitting on the bumpstops or just about an inch or less off of them. The gf has a 99 taco extra cab 4x4 SR5 off road and 4cyl 2.7, I put an Alaskan camper which weighs 1100 lbs in back of it, some food, camping stuff, ect and was under it's rated 1600 lbs. Now while driving down a smooth highway or road it was fine, however when you hit a bump it would come down hit the bumpstops trying to dislodge your kidneys, then bounce around a little. Now take a half ton chevy and you can put a full cord of elm in back, deliver it to town at highway speeds and never come close to the bumpstops (I would not recommend doing it everyday, but have no problem with power or braking). Sure the tail end is dragging a little but not out of springs yet. I would encourage you guys to actually weigh your loads and look at how close to the bumpstops you are in a taco with 1600 lbs of payload. As far as both being half ton trucks they are not, at least not that I have ever heard of. An S-10, Ranger, Taco, Nissan frontier, ect. are all listed as 1/4 ton pickups, not half ton, even look on most the titles I have seen and it lists them as 1/4 ton. They usually overrate the 1/4 ton pickups to sell them, and underrate the 1/2, 3/4, 1 ton pickups to keep people from overloading them. They probably figure most people who buy a toy are not buying it to haul tow much of anything very often, or are mainly using it as a hunting/offroad/town pickup. If I had the tractor with a loader running right now I would have the gf bring out her toy, load it with two concrete railroad ties (800lbs each), then take a pic of the frame to bumpstop difference as well as how much it sagged. Then do the same on my half ton 85 chevy. 

Just a questions cheeves but how come the taco can make it to the wood but not your chevy? Is it a width thing? And yes the smaller trucks tend to get better mileage, less hp with less weight.


----------



## Dalmatian90 (Dec 16, 2011)

> Now take a half ton chevy and you can put a full cord of elm in back,



Two words: Bull ####.


----------



## 1project2many (Dec 16, 2011)

This is a reply to Excalibur. It's an epic.

Excalibur wrote:


> tooold I think you got me all wrong-I am not trying to say your truck is not the best for what you are doing, or that it doesn't work for you, that's great if it does. Like I said small trucks have a place. What I am worried about is someone with a toy that is factory rated for 1600 lbs of payload loading 2800 lbs in back of it then trying to soup it up to carry that weight safely.



Well don't worry. I have the ability, skill, and intelligence to pull this off safely. 

Your faith that a 1 ton truck gets similar mileage to this truck may be based on limited experience. EPA rated economy is obtained by specially trained drivers in controlled environments and corrected with a "fudge factor" to better represent real world conditions. Other than the Mercedes Sprinters in our fleet, you'll be hard pressed to find a one ton vehicle obtaining over 16 mpg. We have Ford, Chevy and Dodge vehicles with engines ranging from 5.2 to 7.3 liters in both diesel and gas. And the average mileage is closer to 10-12 mpg. For reference, gasoline engine vehicles with a computer controlling them run within a fairly limited fuel:air range. On the lean side they are around 15 parts air to one part fuel and under load the amount of fuel increases. That severely compromises the options for increasing fuel economy on a gas engine. Diesels can run much leaner but the turbo diesel trucks on average don't do as well as naturally aspirated counterparts. When your 6.2 was enlarged to 6.5l and turbocharged, fuel economy dropped into the 14-16 mpg range on the highway. I'm part caveman myself and I just love having a honkin big engine but I've owned and worked on enough of them in my life to know that on average more displacement uses more fuel.

Your surprise that a one truck costs more to own is unexpected. From the day I head to the town hall to register the truck I'm paying more. A major part of my registration costs are based on published or stated GVW, whichever is larger. A 10k lb vehicle costs more than a 5k lb vehicle. Then I head to the gas pump and get hit again. $45 to fill my tank vs $80 to $100 for the one ton. Oh, unless it's a diesel then it's $100 to $130 (at $100 that's my entire fuel budget for 2 weeks... can I drive the one ton 80 miles a day for two weeks?) Now I bring it down for mandatory state inspection and get hit for front and rear brakes. I buy them at my cost through the shop and do all the work myself. Rear drums for the one ton are $85 each, rear shoes are $70. Let's skip hardware. For a 2wd, front rotors are $80 each and front pads are $35. We buy these in volume so I get good pricing. Rear seal for the full floater is $12 so two of them are $24. Front seals are about $11 for the pair. $470 for the bare minimum on parts. For $470 I can buy shoes, pads, drums, rotors, calipers, wheel cylinders, hardware, coffee before I start and lunch before I'm finished for the Toyota. And that's not the cheap stuff. I keep maintenance records for my truck and maintenance records for our fleet vehicles (nearly 100 vehicles in all). I can show you consistently that the one ton vehicles require more maintenance over the same amount of mileage than smaller vehicles in the fleet, and that the maintenance is more costly when performed. And I can show that my truck has required far less work than the one ton fleet vehicles which also translates to lower cost even though it has accumulated the same total mileage.

Your suggestion to buy another truck is not viable. I cannot buy a new outfit and I won't have any money to purchase a used one unless I sell the Toy. If we eliminate the 1/2 ton and 3/4 ton trucks (since mine's rated at 1400 lbs) and limit purchase to one tons, the main source of one ton trucks for the used truck market is contractors and construction companies. For the most part these guys "use up" a truck before unloading it so it's a realistic expectation that I'll be investing repair costs into any used truck I buy. My truck is a 4X4 because I have to be able to get to and from work in the worst weather and I'm going to have a 4X4 truck if I replace it. This Yota might fetch $2k without a bed (I'm keeping the dump) so I've got $2k to spend. In 4 pages of searching Craigslist for one ton trucks priced at 2k or below, here's the only complete truck I found:
"Good running truck. Cab good. Fame rusted bad. Make good farm truck. VERY IMPORTANT TRUCK HAS RARE ENGINE 454CU, 4 SPEED STANDARD-2 WHEEL DRIVE." It's a 100 mile trip to get it and I'll have to pay someone to move it because I don't have a 1 ton to haul my trailer. It's got a drivetrain capable of a whopping 8 mpg (which, BTW, doesn't make as much power as the engine in the Toy), it's 2wd, and it's got a bad frame. I'm sure you can do the math on this potential investment. A realistic cost for a used 4X4 one ton, usable and driveable, is around $4k. Ain't got that to spend.

Your assertion that the Toyota is not capable of carrying one ton safely is inaccurate. Since the rated payload is already 100lbs short of 3/4 ton, and since old Yotas are notoriously overengineered, I can make an argument that it currently is safe with no additional modification. _The frame of the older truck was far more durable than the new Tacoma. The older truck has a fully boxed, internally gussetted frame that is capable of up to a 1 ton load capacity with minor modifications, including different springs and full floating rear axles. _ Hiluxdifferences As I've said twice before, it's factory equipped with the same brakes and axle parts as single wheel one ton trucks from the previous generation. In addition I've upgraded engine power and added a bed with additional support rails. It's one ton capable. I'm considering adding additional braking for my peace of mind. I don't feel the sway on this truck with that load was any greater than sway experienced in the single wheel, high top handicap vans I service at work but I am considering options for better sway control regardless. One poster here suggested Timbrens and I'm going to look into those. I have a small pile of rear sway bars from different vehicles but before I start changing bars I'm going to have to measure weight bias empty and work out vehicle roll center front and rear to determine how much anti sway control I need front vs rear. I don't want this truck to get too loose like many of the older rigs are. 

In addition the overall size of a vehicle is a big consideration. In Nebraska you have plenty of space. Not here. Everything is smaller, tighter, more compact, and there are more people and more cars around. They're like little ants in a big hurry, everywhere. Your old, slow diesel truck was never popular here. I don't know if I could find one here today other than on the National Guard base. Bit I guess when you have weapons the size of SUV's you don't have to worry about other drivers. A large box and a long chassis add to the frustration level when you go to town and have to navigate the streets, traffic, and too small parking areas. And you might be amazed at how stupidly people drive around you. It's like they have "Must not be behind truck" drilled into their heads. You get cut off, raced around, passed in no passing zones, all because you have a "BIG" truck. Some people can deal with it every day but I only have so much patience.

Everything has pros and cons. If we accept that the guys with one ton trucks will also overload them, then I'll say I definitely have to make more trips with my small truck to carry the same amount of wood. But I usually work by myself and my body's nowhere near its prime so the load I pictured is about all I get in one day. Now that I have a family I am thinking it'd be nice to have a larger cab. Toyota didn't export a 4 dr cab to the US until the Tacoma generation and that's not the same truck as this one. Like Zogger, building a 4dr truck doesn't make sense to me. And I don't like using the light duty transmission in that rig but options for heavier trans are limited. The only heavier bolt in replacement is in high demand with the crawler guys and sells in the 600-800 dollar range. And even though the truck has plenty of power and has reasonable economy, I'm thinking of getting a Mercedes 4 or 5 cylinder turbo diesel which would require another round of changes to the drivetrain that I really don't need to get into. Yet until I find that truck is unfit for my needs, I will continue to use it. If necessary I will use my skills and abilities to extend its capabilities as long as the investment of time and money make sense.

Now if ya wanna bring your truck out here for a few weeks next year and help me haul some good hardwood back and forth, I'd be more than happy to let you put a ton or two of good Oak on your outfit for the trip home. 5000 miles divided by 21 mpg * $4/gallon is under $1000 for fuel. That's pretty cheap for a cord of wood that should last an entire winter in that magic stove of yours.


----------



## EXCALIBER (Dec 16, 2011)

Ok where to start. First off most any newer fullsize truck will get 18-20 mpg empty. Dads 01 crewcab 4x4 dually duramax 18 empty but it has a chip in it. Mom's 04 crewcab 4x4 dually duramax 19 empty no chip. I would say you will get 17-20 in almost any 1 ton 4x4 truck with a diesel and a little less with a gas 15-18. Now your saying turbo diesels get worse mileage than a naturally aspirated motor? I would beg to differ! Yes fully loaded you will get 10-13mpg in a newer truck. Now to further say they enlarged the 6.2 to a 6.5 and turbo it??? The 6.2 is a different engine altogether then the 6.5 turbo. The 6.2L was made by detroit and not gm. The 6.5 was made by GM and they turbo it. However the 6.2 was, and is, a better engine and I put banks turbo's on all of mine except my present one. With a 6.2 banks turbo it outperforms the 6.5 in hp and torque, it will burn the tires off of the truck. Clearly you are the one showing very limited experience. A 6.2 turbo in a half ton chevy will yield consistent 25mpg on the highway.

Now cost of ownership: true most heaver trucks are more expensive to register. More at the pump yes and no. Just depends on the truck but the average it will be very close to the same mileage doing the same work, after all that is what trucks are for, not commuting. Furthermore you must have very cheap fuel if you can drive 80 miles a day for two weeks on $100. Lets do the math. 80x10 (working days) =800miles Now at 3.20 per gallon of gas that works out to be $100/3.2=31.25gallons for every two weeks. Now that means you are getting, oh lets see, 800miles/ 31.25 gal=25.6MPG Now since you said everyday that would bump you up to 80x14=1120 miles so 1120/31.25=35.84 MPG wow. Now some of the parts on a larger truck will cost more true. That being said they also last longer and need less replacing. Now you say you are not buying the cheap stuff? Toyota parts are very good if not he best, so call them and ask how much for the parts. I know when I did my 91 toy landcruiser stater, from toy the starter was $600. Now call GM direct and parts will be way cheaper for a gm product, though still high compared to autozone or the like. Now I hear what you said from every small truck toy guy I have ever run into in my life. "I can show you consistently that the one ton vehicles require more maintenance over the same amount of mileage than smaller vehicles in the fleet, and that the maintenance is more costly when performed. And I can show that my truck has required far less work than the one ton fleet vehicles which also translates to lower cost even though it has accumulated the same total mileage". Oh how many times must I hear such a statement, that is correct, but without all the factors that need to be put into the equations. Heck I bet the cars require even less maintenance than the small pickups! First you are correct smaller trucks will need less maintenance for the same mileage as a fullsize pickup, within a certain mileage. So TRUE. However what you fail to realize is the reason the larger fullsize trucks need more maintenance is they are being USED FOR A TRUCK! Lets take for instance hauling wood, you will have to make 6 trips with your toy to be doing the same amount of work you would in one trip with a 1 ton. Mileage fails to factor in when you will be doing 6 times the amount of travel, 6 times the amount of trips and time wasted going back and forth. 

Now I cannot say to what you could buy a nice 4x4 1/2 ton, or larger GM for, but most everywhere I have been you can buy one for around $1000 up for a mechanically sound truck. Not pretty mind you but reliable (older 80's). As far as 8 mpg in a gm you need to learn to turn the choke off! LOL jk any good running 4x4 gm might get 8 or even 6 mpg fully loaded to the nuts, however empty you will get around 13-14 with a 350 chevy. I guess I would have to ask what engine you have in your toy that gets 25-36mpg and makes over 270hp plus??? Sounds a little off to me. Like I said many times not putting anyone down or their truck just use it within its parameters or close to it. As for as brakes on you half ton toy they are very different form one ton brakes, not even close. Your wheels and tires will also be different. The axles are also different.http://www.toyotamotorhomes.com/technicaldocs/Axle_FAQ.pdf

I would like to bring my truck out there sometime although I would bring my bigger truck and trailer to haul more wood. However, sadly, most states no longer allow you hauling wood across state lines, and even some counties have strict no haul laws. Like I said as long as your truck meets your needs GREAT! Just don't lie to yourself and say its a one ton in disguise, and hope it holds together especially on the crowded roads you describe. Would be terrible to kill someones family because you though you could handle the load safely just saying. Off road load it all you want I guess till the axle breaks and gives out, or you fly off the road due to lack of breaks, your choice I guess. I am just merely trying to show that there is a difference that maybe you were not aware of. Magic stove no just a top of the line stove that works very well. I have yet to catch the stove loading any wood into itself, emptying its own ashes, or out cutting wood while I am sleeping, well yet anyway! LOL

Dalmation 90 sorry didn't get any pics of the load as I was in a hurry. I have some old ones though of the trailer with over a cord in it and the truck with half cord (off road slow driving as trailer has no shocks). Yes a 3/4 or 1 ton would be better for a full cord although a half ton will handle it safely. 




Please I encourage anyone doubting my statement to load up their ranger, toy, nissan, ect with the same amount of wood (over a cord of elm) and please post up the pics. I would almost pay to see one of those trucks smashed under the weight. After all Your Ranger is a half ton right Dalmation??? Yeah though not! It is a quarter ton not half ton. 

Seriously just was trying to throw a word of caution out and maybe have some of you do some research to find out the truth, and it was clear you had been mislead or just did not know. Not trying to stir the pot. Read my posts like I said many times I like little trucks as they have their uses.


----------



## Lumberjack2277 (Dec 16, 2011)

OK.... here's one of my Custom built trucks i've built for off-road hauling/recovery. I used a Kaiser 2.5 ton cut down and single tired.... did all the work myself in my shop. I'm known for building wild rides around here! There is videos on youtube under my username Towman2277. It's a BEAST! Never took any pics of it loaded yet though... ;-(

View attachment 211833


----------



## bcorradi (Dec 17, 2011)

Here is my 1/2 ton ford ranger.

View attachment 211857
View attachment 211858


----------



## 1project2many (Dec 17, 2011)

Excalibur, you live in flatland. You can travel long distances with minimal elevation changes. This ain't the same country and it ain't the same driving. Using economy numbers you obtain isn't a direct comparison with average economy numbers here. I think last time I went to Alliance I put a small brick on the throttle when I left Wyoming and never touched it again until Hemingford. Can't do that here.

6.5 is 6.2 enlarged. I've been doing this for a long time. Heads can be swapped back and forth. Pan, timing cover, timing components can be swapped back and forth. Injection pumps and injectors can be swapped between engines. Water pumps are interchangeable. 6.2 top end on 6.5 with 6.5 prechambers yields more power and better response. Doesn't take much time to find this info. _The GM 6.2L and 6.5L diesel engines are dimensionally identical, and nearly every bolt-on component on either engine will interchange with the other._ 
6.2/6.5 Diesel Conversions - The High Points - TheDieselPage.com Forums 
Dieselpage.com is a great resource if you're into those engines. Also, good buildup of race engine using mix of 6.2 and 6.5 parts:500hp 6.5L Diesel Race Engine - Diesel Power Magazine

Yes, my fuel economy is about 24 mpg unloaded. Gasoline here is at $3.15/gallon today. Actual round trip mileage is 76.2. Mileage will increase if I can make time to get laptop out and finish tuning ecm. 21 mpg with diesel at $3.82 / gallon gets me 28% fewer miles traveled for the same amount of money. 

I said in the first post I had .58 cord in the truck. I don't need 6 trips to haul the same wood as a one ton. And my truck has been mine for as long as I've been burning wood so my maintenance figures include all the trips I've had to make to get the wood I've burned. Our one ton chassis vehicles run empty as often as they run full and they are never at max capacity by weight. I think I do have all the factors included. My truck has 300,000 miles on it and I can pull vehicles with more, less, or similar mileage out of the fleet records to compare. Time spent traveling to / from wood doesn't cost me money. No lost wages on days off.

You're gonna be hard pressed to find a one ton truck here for $1000. That ad I posted for the rotten farm truck was listed at $950. We live in an area defined as "high corrosion" by most automakers. Vehicles out here tend to show rust in 10 years and by 15 years many of them are junk. I owned a 72 C30 ramp truck for hauling the race car and it had rusted really badly to the point where it wouldn't pass a safety inspection. I sold it a few years ago for $2500 to the first guy that came along. He had the wallet out immediately and didn't ask any questions.

Lotsa folks are surprised to find the '89 454 1 ton truck engine was rated at 230 hp. All of the 7.4 TBI truck engines make low power. My engine makes more than 230 hp.



> I would have to ask what engine you have in your toy that gets 25-36mpg and makes over 270hp plus???


I've got a 22RTE short block from an 86 Toyota turbo truck combined with a 91 22RE head and intake and an aftermarket towing / RV cam. I'm using a VF34 roller bearing turbo making 11 psi boost through a Volvo intercooler. I'm running 2.5" exhaust from the turbo back although I opted to retain the stock exhaust manifold. I've replaced the distributor with distributorless ignition using a GM module and homemade trigger wheel. Fuel and spark are managed by a GM 1227749 computer from a GMC Syclone / Pontiac turbo Sunbird. The numbers aren't quite as good as what you've suggested but I'm not hiding or exaggerating anything. Although I haven't updated it over the summer, you can read more about the truck here: 1991 Toyota Pickup

The axle information you've linked to is for dual wheel, full floating axles which Toyota supplied for chassis that spend most of their time fully loaded and are expected to travel hundreds of miles a day for days at a time. Here's the one ton single wheel in a couple of different years:
1992 Toyota 1 Ton Pickup Commercial - YouTube
1986 - Commercial - Toyota One-Ton Pickup Truck - Looking out for #1 - YouTube

Single wheel semi floater just like mine. 

Caution is good. Killing people is bad. I never suspected this thread would get this response but it's not bad to ask "Are you sure you know what you're doing?" when safety's on the line.

In all honesty, I wouldn't tow your single axle short tongue trailer with that much weight and no brakes in this area so as crazy as you think I am, what you think is ok I see as dangerous. To each his own. If you know your rig and know your area, it's not my job to question your ability. I can say that combo would likely get you pulled over by a cop here although you might be able to convince him it's ok without too much trouble. We can definitely see that truck overloading is a chronic problem among woodburners, no matter if it's in one vehicle or a combination of truck and trailer, no matter if it's in a Toyota or a Chevy.


----------



## zogger (Dec 17, 2011)

Lumberjack2277 said:


> OK.... here's one of my Custom built trucks i've built for off-road hauling/recovery. I used a Kaiser 2.5 ton cut down and single tired.... did all the work myself in my shop. I'm known for building wild rides around here! There is videos on youtube under my username Towman2277. It's a BEAST! Never took any pics of it loaded yet though... ;-(
> 
> View attachment 211833



Nice bobbed job man! Ya, I bet it is a beast!


----------



## zogger (Dec 17, 2011)

*Ranger*



bcorradi said:


> Here is my 1/2 ton ford ranger.
> 
> View attachment 211857
> View attachment 211858



Just was reading Ford stopped making Rangers the other day. No more smaller trucks from Ford, full size and larger.


----------



## beerman6 (Dec 17, 2011)

bcorradi said:


> Here is my 1/2 ton ford ranger.
> 
> View attachment 211857
> View attachment 211858


:msp_thumbup: I was hoping one of them would show up in this thread.


----------



## 1project2many (Dec 17, 2011)

Dieselnut, how many cords will your dump trailer hold? Not sure. Are we talking cords with the Toyota attached, or without? 

Lumberjack277, I probably couldn't afford to keep fuel in that rig but the time saved by hauling several complete trees back to the house for processing would more than make up. Kewl ride!


----------



## EXCALIBER (Dec 17, 2011)

1project2many I think we are getting closer to understanding where we see things different. First yes I do live in the flat land now, however, I was born and raised in MT so I do know a little about driving in the mountains. I can also see how you think the 6.2 and 6.5 are the same engine being many of the parts will interchange, so I will concede a little and call it even. I personally would not call them the same engine for the following reasons; First you cannot take a 6.2 engine block (well except for the last year or two about less than 10% total) and bore it out to a 6.5, the blocks are different. Second the 6.2 engine was built by detroit for gm, the 6.5 was built by gm. The 6.5 also had way shorter life spans and problematic heads causing overheating on almost everyone I owned. So I see your side of this on how if many of the parts are the same, then it has to be the same engine. However I would not say a Honda small engine is the same as a Chinese copy, just because they look identical and many of the exact same parts will swap back and forth. Good discussion though.

Now as far as the axles in a toy, the early axles in the one tons, were similar to yours. The duallys just basically had an extra tire and rim added to help with the weight. However Toyota was force to recall them by the DOT saftey admin due to the wheels falling off as you drove down the road. Imagine doing 75 with a load of wood and watching your tires pass you down the road. They were not full floating axles and so they lacked sufficient bearings to haul that much weight. Some would last years before going out, some would not make it a couple hundred miles, some are still running. They then stepped up to the full floating axle in later years to address this problem. I guess I could say my half ton gm axle would be a one ton if gm had put it under a one ton, however we all know it would soon meet the same fate as the early toy axle. Simply not enough bearings to hold the load. The more weight you put on the truck, and the more miles, the sooner the axle fails. This is why gm primarily uses the full floater on most of its trucks that are going to see heavy hauling everyday.

Sounds like you have done lots of work on your truck. You must enjoy working on it, good for you. I just never have the time for such a project. Also doesn't sound like there is much toy left in the toy, engine mods from many different vehicles, different gear ratio than stock, different bed, reinforce frame, suspension, ect. I don't want you to take this wrong, as I am not meaning it that way, but how much do you have invested in parts, wrenching time, ect to basically rebuild your whole truck? Seems when I looked into such a project it was not anywhere near cost effective for the effort/money, compared to just buying a different truck. I mean I guess I could put rockwell duece axles under my half ton, different engine maybe a duramax, different tranny, gear ratio's, frame ect. but would it be a half ton chevy when I was done? Oh yeah and I guess if we are allowed to soup up the engine ect I could make and easy 400 hp with the duramax diesel and 1000 ft lbs torque while getting 25 to the gallon. Doing all these mods would be like saying the nascar trucks are the same as the stock s-10 pickups you could buy. Like I said we clearly look at things in a totally different light. As far as overloading I solved that problem with a larger truck trailer, got feeling sorry for my half ton. I run out of room for the wood long before I run out of load capacity.










That being said I am glad you enjoy your truck, and working on it. I wish sometimes I had the time for a project. It suits your needs and I hope you realize I was never trying to demean your truck or efforts, each to their own. 

beerman6 you caught me, let the flogging begin. I had totally forgot ford liked to slap the ranger emblem on everything, as it was cheaper to keep producing the same emblem rather than commission a new one! :eek2: Lol jk I think we all we referring to the now deceased ford shall we say ford ranger jr. the 1/4 ton

Lumberjack277 was always curious why people cut the rear axles off the dueces. Guess a parking spot is easier to fit into that way, better mileage and a little less weight. Wouldn't another set of driving axles had helped you offroad though? Don't see how turning radius would be much improved as it still will only turn so sharp. What would be the load cap now, 5000lbs??? Oh yeah when your done with that winch let me know, I could use one of them on mine just so I have a place to stand when opening the hood. Nice truck, and as discussed, not putting yours down I am just curious, everyone has different needs in a truck. However where is the wood, HMM???


----------



## jtimm (Dec 17, 2011)

I could make and easy 400 hp with the duramax diesel and 1000 ft lbs torque while getting 25 to the gallon. 

Yeah right, who are you trying to fool? I don't believe that mileage for a minute?


----------



## Lumberjack2277 (Dec 17, 2011)

EXCALIBER said:


> Lumberjack277 was always curious why people cut the rear axles off the dueces. Guess a parking spot is easier to fit into that way, better mileage and a little less weight. Wouldn't another set of driving axles had helped you offroad though? Don't see how turning radius would be much improved as it still will only turn so sharp. What would be the load cap now, 5000lbs??? Oh yeah when your done with that winch let me know, I could use one of them on mine just so I have a place to stand when opening the hood. Nice truck, and as discussed, not putting yours down I am just curious, everyone has different needs in a truck. However where is the wood, HMM???




Only reason I cut down deuces is simple. CASH MONEY$$$$ I can buy a duece 2.5 ton for around $3000. Remove the rear end, cut 40" off the frame, and hang some springs. Sell the rear end for $400-500. Install super singles ($400) and sell the truck online ALL DAY LONG for over $7500. CASH. Otherwise, I keep them together. My personal truck I keep for myself is complete, w/w. I use my deuce to pull my 25,000 lb pintle hitch trailer ;-) Haul my big Cat that way!


View attachment 211991
View attachment 211992


----------



## 1project2many (Dec 17, 2011)

> Sounds like you have done lots of work on your truck. You must enjoy working on it, good for you. I just never have the time for such a project. Also doesn't sound like there is much toy left in the toy, engine mods from many different vehicles, different gear ratio than stock, different bed, reinforce frame, suspension, ect. I don't want you to take this wrong, as I am not meaning it that way, but how much do you have invested in parts, wrenching time, ect to basically rebuild your whole truck?



Well, this is what I do. I've been modifying, rebuilding and fixing since before I could drive. My first truck was a 55 Chevy pickup built from about 6 different trucks that I bought with money from paper route, lawn mowing, etc. I couldn't afford to buy the vehicle I wanted then and maybe that's why I tend to build what I want today. The Yota hasn't been an expensive project, and most of it is still Toyota. It's all about watching for deals and planning the repairs out so they can be done in small steps. I've gotten parts as trades for helping people, I've been allowed to strip parts from rusty trucks that are bound for the junkyard, I've learned to use Craigslist very well, and I've been lucky enough to make friends in parts stores, junk yards, and machine shops. Except for the 4 months while the engine swap was going on and a time when the original engine had a failed head, the truck has never been down for for more than a couple of days. I'm doing a vegetable oil conversion to a Mercedes diesel right now that's been 6 months long and still counting. I usually get about half an hour before work to make progress and that's only if there are no buses down, no lightbulbs to change, etc. I've got a really nice heated tank built and I've been working on a good filter system to clean up the oil before burning it but that's where progress ends. Too much work to do to spend all my time having fun. You know, 1project2many.


----------



## lmbrman (Jan 24, 2012)

just want to let some on here know that toyotas do come with four piston calipers - most 'real' pickup do not

yes, I know it looks overloaded, prolly why it is getting tired at 250,000 miles with a 5speed and 4 cylinder, and I understand there are risks, but I drive log truck on a regular basis, and the toyota does not worry me one bit


----------

