# F150



## Adios Pantalones (Oct 20, 2013)

Been thinking about buying a truck. I'd like to put a cap on it for hauling around show stuff, occasionally hauling 5x8 enclosed trailer, maybe a load of wood now and then.

I see good reviews etc on the F150. Without getting into the BS guy thing about this or that brand being crap, any good feedback on issues, etc? I'm looking for reliable, lightish duty, and OK gas mileage.


----------



## Mrs. Krabappel (Oct 20, 2013)

My brother does painting/drywall all around Miami.  He racks up a lot of miles primarily on surface roads.  He's been very pleased with his F150.


----------



## fossil (Oct 20, 2013)

Edmunds sez the top three selling full-size pickups in America are the Ram 1500, the F-150, and the Chevy Silverado.  Couple of my nephews have Rams, and they love them, but I think they work them harder than you're talking about.  Toyotas might be worth a look, as well.  There are lots of fine trucks from which to choose.  Have fun!


----------



## Gary_602z (Oct 20, 2013)

I think it would do you a good job. 

Gary


----------



## begreen (Oct 21, 2013)

How do the top 3 trucks stand up to road salt? Rust issues? For gas mileage I think the RAM is the champ.


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Oct 21, 2013)

begreen said:


> How do the top 3 trucks stand up to road salt? Rust issues? For gas mileage I think the RAM is the champ.


Ram does look better for mileage. I would ideally like something with a back seat- the price for Ram trucks jumps a lot more that the F150 for that option, so there is a tradeoff to consider


----------



## jeff_t (Oct 21, 2013)

Buying new?


----------



## jeff_t (Oct 21, 2013)

Adios Pantalones said:


> Ram does look better for mileage. I would ideally like something with a back seat- the price for Ram trucks jumps a lot more that the F150 for that option, so there is a tradeoff to consider



I'm not sure if it still the case, but when I looked a couple of years ago, the F150 was available as a real four door crew with a 6.5' box. The Ram only had that 5'-whatever box with a four door.


----------



## Jags (Oct 21, 2013)

Are you looking at a new or used purchase?  There are some pros/cons to each truck and that can vary quite a bit from year to year/engine/tranny, etc.

As an example - Dodge 360 in a half ton gets crap gas mileage, but the newer models, even with the hemi can get as good, if not better mileage.


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Oct 21, 2013)

Right now I'm thinking new


----------



## Jags (Oct 21, 2013)

Lots of good options right now.  Ford has a high mileage "eco boost" engine that seems to be performing well, and the new ones are put together very well (neighbor at the river has one).  Dodge has a similar design that can also shut off cylinders.  Dodge is also coming out with a V6 turbo diesel, but no real world info on performance.


----------



## peakbagger (Oct 21, 2013)

Not sure if you have owned a truck in the past but despite all the electronics, a 2wd pickup truck unloaded is just about worthless for traction in snow  especially if it doesn't have limited slip rear end. Once you load them up they are a lot better but that is why most folks buy four wheel drive and live with the lower gas mileage and higher long term maintenance costs. ABS brakes help a bit in stopping than prior trucks without but not by much. Hard to justify a new truck for occasional work and good front wheel drive econobox with snow tires will run circles around a truck for winter use. Lot to be said for buying a used truck and use it when you need it but run a car when you don't.


----------



## Utilitrack (Oct 21, 2013)

Jags said:


> Lots of good options right now.  Ford has a high mileage "eco boost" engine that seems to be performing well, and the new ones are put together very well (neighbor at the river has one).  Dodge has a similar design that can also shut off cylinders.  Dodge is also coming out with a V6 turbo diesel, but no real world info on performance.


 +1  on Ford F150 with Ecoboost, bought a used 2011Tundra earlier this year, I got a great deal on it, but I would have bought the Ford F150 with Ecoboost if I could have found what I was looking for.


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Oct 21, 2013)

Thanks all. Ya, I'd go with 4wd- it's basically a must in my neighborhood. It would be a bit more than "occasional use". Right now I feel like I will prematurely burn out the engine on my Subie towing a trailer every other weekend spring through December (and I can commute in my wife's car most days, as she travels).


----------



## semipro (Oct 21, 2013)

Brand names aside there are a lot of options when choosing a pickup truck configuration. 
We purchased a dual cab pickup with short bed (5') and it has really worked well for us for hauling, towing, everyday driving.
I never thought the back seat would be that useful but it really is. 
I've found the shorter bed to be ideal.  With the double cab a full bed would have made the truck too long. Almost everything we've needed to haul does well in the smaller bed, including firewood.  We have a bed extender that can be used when needed to increase capacity.  I also find the bed extender very useful when hauling lumber and materials even too long for a larger bed. 
For really long stuff we either open the rear sliding window,  use the roof racks, or use a rack that attaches to the hitch receiver. 
I've found this truck to be a great tool.  I load up my tools in it and move it to wherever I'm working, put the tailgate down, and get after it.  The satellite radio comes in real handy then too. 

Edit: if you're going to haul firewood figure out a way to protect your rear window for loading.


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Oct 21, 2013)

Ya, I need better than 6' at least. I have shelving that is that long that I haul around on a regular basis. A full 8' bed is less than a $1k option, but then it gets harder to manage. Ford has a 6'5" or something option that could be ideal.


----------



## blades (Oct 21, 2013)

Ran a 99 F150, 4x4, extra cab, 6.5  box 4.6l v8 up til last year I was happy with it,  Got used 250 5.4l  same configuration. Been good so far. The F150 could not handle my SS and trailer legally, 250 can.  Unless things have changed ford and chevy/gm have beefier front ends than dodge.


----------



## Ashful (Oct 21, 2013)

I've owned all three brands, in the order Ford, Chevy, Dodge.  All 1/2 ton (F-150 / K1500 / 1500 SLT), but being vastly different years, it's hard to compare.  I buy based on pricing and options available that year, and am not loyal to any brand.  I will say that all three did their job well, without major trouble, but I generally liked the Chevy best and Ford the least.  The Chevy was heavier than the other two, in terms of suspension, factory tires (the Dodge came with station wagon tires not even rated to the GVW of the truck! ), body, and bed.  The Chevy was also the most expensive and least powerful, with Dodge excelling at cost per performance, with the possible concession of quality.  The sheet metal on my Dodge is much thinner than the Chevy, such that putting anything heavy in the bed of the Dodge deforms the floor of the bed, under my heavy sprayed-in liner.  The Ford rusted like nobody's business, but I'd guess they've improved their coatings since then.  The Chevy had more expensive repairs than the other two, but I also had double the mileage on that truck, versus the other two.


----------



## Jags (Oct 21, 2013)

What year was the Dodge, Joful?  I literally "chuck" wood into the bed of mine and was just commenting on it a couple of days ago at how well the bed has held up.


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Oct 21, 2013)

Thanks, all. I think that cars/trucks of all sort are better at resisting body rot and maintaining value. Remember the 70's-80's, when every third car had major rot (at least in northern states)?  The trade off is that you need an engineering degree to work on them. 

I don't really need excessive power, so it sounds like any one would do


----------



## Jags (Oct 21, 2013)

Adios Pantalones said:


> I don't really need excessive power, so it sounds like any one would do


 And that is okay, but remember - you can go too far the other way.  If you get a slug of an engine you are constantly working it hard just to get it down the road.  I drove a half ton dodge with a V6 in it once.  It couldn't get out of its own way.


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Oct 21, 2013)

Jags said:


> And that is okay, but remember - you can go too far the other way.  If you get a slug of an engine you are constantly working it hard just to get it down the road.  I drove a half ton dodge with a V6 in it once.  It couldn't get out of its own way.



If you get any sort of extended cab, Ford and I think the others automatically drop an 8 cyl in it


----------



## firefighterjake (Oct 21, 2013)

Jags said:


> And that is okay, but remember - you can go too far the other way.  If you get a slug of an engine you are constantly working it hard just to get it down the road.  I drove a half ton dodge with a V6 in it once.  It couldn't get out of its own way.


 

Owned a Toyota 4Runner with a V-6 that was like that . . . just about useless for towing anything. Ended up going in the opposite direction with a big ol' V-8 in the Nissan Titan . . . plenty of power . . . but I pay for it at the pump.


----------



## Hokerer (Oct 21, 2013)

Adios Pantalones said:


> If you get any sort of extended cab, Ford and I think the others automatically drop an 8 cyl in it


 
The EcoBoost is a six and you can get that in extended and crew cabs.

By the way, have alway driven F-150s:  1985 Reg Cab, traded for an 2001 Crew Cab, traded for a 2012 Extended Cab


----------



## USMC80 (Oct 21, 2013)

love mine, I have to say don't buy brand new.  You can find a 2012 with 20k miles on it for sooooo much cheaper


----------



## Vic99 (Oct 21, 2013)

If buying 2013, Toyota Tundra has a 6.5 and 8 ft bed with back seats.  Having an 8 ft bed for almost 5 years, you just get so many more options open to you.  Get a liner, too.

I test drove one 5 years ago with the wife.  We thought we could sublet the back cabin to supplement our mortgage payment . . . . this from us not ever owning a truck before, though.

http://autos.aol.com/cars-Toyota-Tu...Cab_Long_Bed_8_ft._box_164.6_in._WB/overview/

Consumer Reports recommend them: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/toyota/tundra.htm


----------



## Vic99 (Oct 21, 2013)

I would second not getting new.

If you want I can give you info from where I bought mine.  Used car/truck dealer not far from where you live, actually.  One sales guy is fair, other is stuff I scrapped off my shoe.  Their mechanic is dynamite.  Let me know.

Also, here's a hybrid if you want to boost mileage:  http://www.gmc.com/sierra-hybrid-pickup-truck.html

I'll spare you the excessive links, but there are some plug-in hybrid trucks scheduled to come out within a year as well.


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Oct 21, 2013)

I've poked through Autotrader for  used F150's, and I have to say- not so much cheaper if you're buying something a couple/few years old IMO. They don't lose $5-10k as soon as they drive off the lot any more. Sure, I could find a 10 yr old truck for cheaper. It looks like they focus on loaded trucks, however. "The Donald Trump Edition"


----------



## Vic99 (Oct 21, 2013)

My truck was 9 years old when I bought it.  As you know, not loaded.  4x4, 8 ft bed, Towing package, bed liner, and power locks baby!

Put 3k a year first year.  Almost doubled that when I started working part time and driving on my own.  Maybe you'll put more on.


----------



## fossil (Oct 21, 2013)

Adios Pantalones said:


> "The Donald Trump Edition"



Yeah, nice, but that brush-over paint job just doesn't do it for me.


----------



## USMC80 (Oct 21, 2013)

I got mine for 22k with 16k miles on it (2 years old) but you wouldn't even know.  You will find the similar trucks running at or around 32k dollars.  It took me a month of research and searching to find the right deal.


----------



## firefighterjake (Oct 21, 2013)

Adios Pantalones said:


> I've poked through Autotrader for  used F150's, and I have to say- not so much cheaper if you're buying something a couple/few years old IMO. They don't lose $5-10k as soon as they drive off the lot any more. Sure, I could find a 10 yr old truck for cheaper. It looks like they focus on loaded trucks, however. "The Donald Trump Edition"


 

When I bought my truck in 2010 I found that to be the case as well . . . the used market wasn't much cheaper than the new vehicles. In the end I ended up going brand new (only the second brand new vehicle my wife and I have bought in our lives) as it just made more sense to go brand new for not a whole lot more. I'm not quite sure why this is the case -- perhaps used vehicles are holding values better? Folks' finances are still pretty tight and a few thousand dollars makes a difference so demand for used is greater?


----------



## Ashful (Oct 21, 2013)

Jags said:


> What year was the Dodge, Joful?  I literally "chuck" wood into the bed of mine and was just commenting on it a couple of days ago at how well the bed has held up.


Not _was_, but _is_... 2005.  It's still my daily driver.  I literally steam-rolled the ribbing out of the bed, when I rolled a 1200 pound-ish safe into the bed on a 4-caster dolly.  Gently tossing splits into the bed has resulted in a few dented wheel wells.  Knocking on the sheetmetal, you can tell very clearly that it's thinner than the bed on my 1995 Chevy.

Another buddy with a 2001'ish Dodge 2500 had the same trouble.  He punched the rear cab corner (between driver's door and rear window) one time, and it caved like it'd been hit by a baseball.  We were both amazed, thinking that tight radius should be one of the strongest parts of the truck.  I think he should've broken his hand, if it were any other truck.

Not ripping on Dodge, since, well... I drive one.  Just stating facts, as I've seen 'em.  It is the nicest looking and least expensive (adjusted) 1/2 ton extended cab v8 pickup I've ever bought.


----------



## flyingcow (Oct 21, 2013)

I wouldn't hesitate on the ford eco boost. they make a heavy half ton that does a nice job. Think the heavy half is rated 11,500lbs or so. I came close to buying anew one. Nice comfortable ride. 

You might want to look at undercoating too. More and more are doing it. This new brine mix is horrendous on our vehicles. Not all undercoating applicators are equal.


----------



## Ashful (Oct 21, 2013)

Adios Pantalones said:


> I've poked through Autotrader for  used F150's, and I have to say- not so much cheaper if you're buying something a couple/few years old IMO. They don't lose $5-10k as soon as they drive off the lot any more.


This is how I ended up buying my first new truck in 2005.  I was looking for something clean, used, perhaps 4 years old and reasonably low miles (40k'ish).  Everything I found was at least 70% the cost of new, with no warranty, service plan, etc.  They were running the "employee pricing" and very nice service programs at the time, making new pretty attractive.  It was really a no-brainer to go new, at the time.

Of course, I paid $26k for a quad-cab (4-door) 1500 SLT with 6.5' bed, 4wd, tow package, and upgraded interior.  I think that package has a STARTING price over $35k now.


----------



## EatenByLimestone (Oct 21, 2013)

I drive an 04 Ram 1500 with 4 doors.  It's been a good truck.  The body is in great shape except for the area above the rear wheels where there is some rust.  If you look around you'll see all Rams rust there.  With the 5.7 I regularly get about 19 driving up into the mountains and about 14 or 15 city driving.  I don't speed on the highway and don't jump light to light, but don't go slow either.  I don't know if I'd go looking for a Hemi again.  The power band is too high for being useful, that said, I've never needed more power down low.  The 4.7 might be all the power I'd need.  Oh, it's a 4x4 also.  It's hard to imagine that a 6Klb 4x will get the mileage it does.  

I really liked the 92 Dakota I drove before I got the Ram.  It had a Magnum 318 in it and all the power came in by 2500rpm.  I couldn't put a baby seat in it though.  

Matt


----------



## Ashful (Oct 21, 2013)

EatenByLimestone said:


> I drive an 04 Ram 1500 with 4 doors.  It's been a good truck.  The body is in great shape except for the area above the rear wheels where there is some rust.  If you look around you'll see all Rams rust there.  With the 5.7 I regularly get about 19 driving up into the mountains and about 14 or 15 city driving.  I don't speed on the highway and don't jump light to light, but don't go slow either.  I don't know if I'd go looking for a Hemi again.  The power band is too high for being useful, that said, I've never needed more power down low.  The 4.7 might be all the power I'd need.  Oh, it's a 4x4 also.  It's hard to imagine that a 6Klb 4x will get the mileage it does.


I have the 4.7L, and it's great for daily driving, but a little under-powered when pulling a trailer over 2k pounds.  What really pisses me off about it is that I only get 14 mpg on a good day, and several buddies at work with 5.7L hemi's get better than that.  I drive manual, versus their automatics, and perhaps with a little more "spirit" than them... but I do wonder if I made a mistake in buying the 4.7L, my sole interest in the smaller motor being (supposedly) better fuel economy.

I will say that the other '04 Ram 1500 I see at work is badly rusted above each rear wheel, and along the bottom of each door.  My '05 is still clean, though, minus many faint brush scratches from being in the woods.


----------



## Retired Guy (Oct 21, 2013)

Just an unscientific observation, but in upstate NY I see a higher number of rusted Rams than any other makes. Could be because they last longer, but I don't think that's the reason.


----------



## EatenByLimestone (Oct 21, 2013)

Joful said:


> I have the 4.7L, and it's great for daily driving, but a little under-powered when pulling a trailer over 2k pounds.  What really pisses me off about it is that I only get 14 mpg on a good day, and several buddies at work with 5.7L hemi's get better than that.  I drive manual, versus their automatics, and perhaps with a little more "spirit" than them... but I do wonder if I made a mistake in buying the 4.7L, my sole interest in the smaller motor being (supposedly) better fuel economy.
> 
> I will say that the other '04 Ram 1500 I see at work is badly rusted above each rear wheel, and along the bottom of each door.  My '05 is still clean, though, minus many faint brush scratches from being in the woods.




That's interesting about the 4.7.  I didn't expect that.  Any trailer I tow is at least 3K.  Probably the most weight I've pulled with it was a double axle uhaul weighed down with firewood and then I filled the bed to where the suspension only had an inch of travel over the snubs.  I wish I had a manual.  I miss driving a 5 speed.  I keep telling myself the next vehicle will be one, but I keep my vehicles so long it's probably wishful thinking.  The way transmissions are going I'll need to get a Wrangler to get anything like a truck with a 5 or 6 speed, and they are useless to tow with since they have such a short wheel base. 



> Just an unscientific observation, but in upstate NY I see a higher number of rusted Rams than any other makes. Could be because they last longer, but I don't think that's the reason.



I see lots of older rusty Rams on the road.  If I knew what the older Chevys and Fords looked like I might recognize older models of them too.  Since 99 I've been driving Dodges, so that's primarily what I pay attention to.  

Matt


----------



## Ashful (Oct 21, 2013)

EatenByLimestone said:


> That's interesting about the 4.7.  I didn't expect that.  Any trailer I tow is at least 3K.  Probably the most weight I've pulled with it was a double axle uhaul weighed down with firewood and then I filled the bed to where the suspension only had an inch of travel over the snubs.  I wish I had a manual.  I miss driving a 5 speed.  I keep telling myself the next vehicle will be one, but I keep my vehicles so long it's probably wishful thinking.  The way transmissions are going I'll need to get a Wrangler to get anything like a truck with a 5 or 6 speed, and they are useless to tow with since they have such a short wheel base.


I've towed many trailers well above 3k lb. with my 4.7L, and it does the job okay with the manual trans, but I wouldn't want that motor if I were towing trailers that heavy on a daily basis.  It's fine around town, but really dogs going up hills at highway speeds.

On the manual trans, you cannot buy a 1/2 ton pickup with a manual trans anymore, excepting Chevy's "work truck" with standard cab and v6.  Add anything beyond a vinyl bench seat, and that manual trans option disappears.  You're forced into 3/4 ton with diesel engine, if you want manual these days.


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Oct 23, 2013)

Thanks, all. We are talking about testing F150 and Tundras this weekend. I did the "build your own" thing on the Ford site. I was confused about the pricing on the axle ratio options.


----------



## JDC1 (Oct 23, 2013)

I have a 2011 supercrew 4x4 lariat f150. Only thing I dislike about the truck was the Pirelli tires that came on it and the 5.5 ft bed is too short.  It has the 5.0l and I use it mainly for city mileage and average 15mpg with the 3.55 gears. Highway goes to 19mpg if i behave. I have towed 7500 lbs regularly and have been extremely happy.   It took awhile to get used to the 6 speed hunting for gears in traffic but now I don't notice it. If you read on the ford and f150 forums the ecoboost v6 isn't doing anything that they claim for fuel mileage. I tested both engines, the ecoboost was impressive but I liked the exhaust tone and lack of turbos on the 5.0.  The 3.7 liter v6 is getting good reviews if you don't need the hp. 

My dad has same truck but 2012 and we both got about $8500 off of MSRP.  If I had to do it again I would have went with max tow and payload package with 6.5 ft bed. 

Good luck.


----------



## timfromohio (Oct 23, 2013)

I guess I'm the only one that would hold off on the Eco-boost.  Depends on how long you keep vehicles - I got rid of my last truck (an F150) after a decade simply b/c I needed more than just the regular cab.  I'd personally wait a few more years to see how the Eco-boost motors perform after having been in service for 5 years or so.


----------



## JDC1 (Oct 23, 2013)

timfromohio said:


> I guess I'm the only one that would hold off on the Eco-boost.  Depends on how long you keep vehicles - I got rid of my last truck (an F150) after a decade simply b/c I needed more than just the regular cab.  I'd personally wait a few more years to see how the Eco-boost motors perform after having been in service for 5 years or so.




That's why I didn't buy the ecoboost. Having a bad experience with the turbo diesel I traded I was looking for a naturally aspirated engine. That being said, the ecoboost is awesome. The majority of the torque comes in at 2500 rpms and holds flat throughout. The owners that I have spoken to have not been impressed with the ecoboost mileage. The hp and torque are closer to the 6.2l and when compared to that engine, mileage is impressive.


----------



## Dix (Oct 23, 2013)

Adios Pantalones said:


> Ya, I need better than 6' at least. I have shelving that is that long that I haul around on a regular basis. A full 8' bed is less than a $1k option, but then it gets harder to manage. Ford has a 6'5" or something option that could be ideal.




Sorry I'm late to the party, AP !

Give that bed length more thought (I haven't read through this thread yet) An 8'  bed is an awesome thing to have, parking be damned !!


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Oct 23, 2013)

I read that the eco-boost engine gets better torque then the V-6, not better mileage. As long as it does not create a reliability problem, it looks like a good trade off.


----------



## Dix (Oct 23, 2013)

Adios Pantalones said:


> Thanks, all. We are talking about testing F150 and Tundras this weekend. I did the "build your own" thing on the Ford site. I was confused about the pricing on the axle ratio options.



For what you want the truck to do, this isn't too much of an issue in my book. Step it up a notch or two and you should be fine. (Haven't read the new specs)

That being said, get the most muscle you can. You won't regret it. 

I agree with the 4WD, get it. It's on the fly, under 40ish for high 4, dead stop for low 4. 

MY F250 has suicide doors. They're OK. Had I given this more thought, I would have gone for the full back doors, but I can live with mine.

Go for a sliding back window, if available. I crack mine about 1/4 open during the summer, leave the front windows open a touch, and don't run the AC most of the summer. This is semi rural driving. You're mileage may vary !


----------



## JDC1 (Oct 23, 2013)

I don't think the 8 ' bed is available with extended ca on the f150s. The ecoboost is a twin turbo v6 that is competing with the v8s for torque and hp. The ecoboost v6 actually is billed as the "towing" engine in fords 1/2 ton trucks.


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Oct 23, 2013)

I don't want the eight-foot bed. The 6 1/2 foot will do fine for me, without the loss in turning radius and parking. I am definitely going for the four-wheel-drive, that is already decided


----------



## flyingcow (Oct 23, 2013)

i have a crew cab with an 8ft bed, you need to pay attention when you pull into the local walmart parking lot. I tend to park aways from the front.


----------



## Hokerer (Oct 23, 2013)

timfromohio said:


> I guess I'm the only one that would hold off on the Eco-boost.  Depends on how long you keep vehicles - I got rid of my last truck (an F150) after a decade simply b/c I needed more than just the regular cab.  I'd personally wait a few more years to see how the Eco-boost motors perform after having been in service for 5 years or so.



No, you're not the only one.  When I bought my 2012 last Summer, I avoided the Eco-boost too.  I'm just not comfortable with the maintenance track record of gasoline turbochargers.


----------



## blades (Oct 24, 2013)

I agree on turbo boosters, the track record while not awful, is a very expensive repair if not done by your self. The two areas I see the most problems with are the waste gate linkages and the compressor bearings.  On the bearings really don't have a fix, but it is very important to be using the oem spec oil weight, with synthetic getting the nod and I would not double the time between oil changes just because its synthetic. Oil Passages in current engines are tiny due to weight reduction.


----------



## timfromohio (Oct 24, 2013)

A good friend just got an F150 this year and while impressed by the acceleration of the eco-boost went for the 5.0L for the reasons we've discussed.  He's been quite happy thus far and uses his truck like a truck - hauling and towing on a regular basis.

I won't tell you guys what I replaced my F150 with as the choruses of laughter would echo across the country ...


----------



## Ashful (Oct 24, 2013)

blades said:


> Oil Passages in current engines are tiny due to weight reduction.


Oil passages are heavy?  ;-)


----------



## EatenByLimestone (Oct 24, 2013)

Yesterday my (just a week until) 4yo saw an Avalanche, she says, "Daddy, look a pretend truck!  It's not a car and not a truck!"

I said that to her once a few months ago when she saw one and I couldn't figure out how to describe it.  She hadn't mentioned it since that day so I forgot all about it.  I figured she did too.  

So now I'll probably find myself talking to somebody with an Avalanche and she'll ask them why they drive a pretend truck.*sigh*

Matt


----------



## Ashful (Oct 24, 2013)

Our kid is within weeks of yours (just turned 4yo), and he'll do a, "remember when..." about something from a year or more ago.  Usually, it takes us a few minutes to figure out what he's recalling, but his memory is amazing.

He likes to point out the "lunch box" cars.  Not sure where he got the name, but he's talking about the many cheaper vehicles (Kia, Scion, etc.) that copied the aerodynamics of the Honda Element.


----------



## Hokerer (Oct 24, 2013)

EatenByLimestone said:


> Yesterday my (just a week until) 4yo saw an Avalanche, she says, "Daddy, look a pretend truck!  It's not a car and not a truck!"
> 
> I said that to her once a few months ago when she saw one and I couldn't figure out how to describe it.  She hadn't mentioned it since that day so I forgot all about it.  I figured she did too.
> 
> ...


 

Remember the old (Rex Harrison?) Dr. Doolittle movie?  We've always referred to the Avalanche as the "Push-me-Pull-you".


----------



## eclecticcottage (Oct 24, 2013)

Lol, we have the Subie version of the Avalanche, the Baja.  If we could only have one vehicle for ever, it would be the one.  It's hauled about as much firewood as either full size truck, gets WAY better gas mileage and kicks the rear end of any 4WD we've owned in the snow.  I don't know that Chevy's version measures up though, lol.

I would never go back to less than a full size bed now after having one on our truck (we've had mini-trucks and Broncos before).  But it does depend on what you do with it.

IMO, test drive all options.  When we were looking to trade our last Baja, we test drove a Ranger and a Tacoma.  We really liked the Taco, but after reading about the surging issues we just bought another Baja!  The fit and finish on the Taco was WAY better than the Ranger and it better mileage, even though we were partial to Ford (as a brand).

Also, if you're willing to drive, check dealers outside of your area if budget is any sort of issue.  We got this Baja for thousands less than we would have paid locally by driving about 4 hours one way for it.  Same with our last one (that one was more like 6, but it was the color DH really wanted and had only 2K on it-for $17K-can't find one like that now, but even then it was a steal).  I found internet shopping gave us more options for less $$.


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Oct 24, 2013)

eclecticcottage said:


> Lol, we have the Subie version of the Avalanche, the Baja.  If we could only have one vehicle for ever, it would be the one.  It's hauled about as much firewood as either full size truck, gets WAY better gas mileage and kicks the rear end of any 4WD we've owned in the snow.  I don't know that Chevy's version measures up though, lol.
> 
> I would never go back to less than a full size bed now after having one on our truck (we've had mini-trucks and Broncos before).  But it does depend on what you do with it.
> 
> ...


I had a Baja. Great, ugly car- loved it!


----------



## timfromohio (Oct 24, 2013)

I have the vehicle inbetween the baja and the avalanche - the Honda Ridgeline.  To me the bed is too small for legitimate hauling, but the vehicle will tow 5000lbs, has great awd, fits the entire family, AND fits in the garage so no more scraping NEOhio snow at 6am before work.  Further, like the baja it has independent rear suspension which makes for a significantly better ride than any vehicle with a solid rear axle (with the obvious tradeoff in lack of hauling capability) and also provides an in-bed trunk.


----------



## EatenByLimestone (Oct 24, 2013)

The ride of the newer trucks has come a long way.  I remember a gf's father had a 58 Chevy truck and I couldn't believe how rough that rode.  

Matt


----------



## eclecticcottage (Oct 25, 2013)

We're a bit unsual I guess, we prefer the older trucks to the newer ones.  We've got a 70's era "custom" F-150 now (I think the only thing they added was the radio and speaker in the dash, and maybe the cloth bench vs vinyl).  I LOVE that truck.  I wish they'd make a f-150S like the GTS Mustangs from the 90's.


----------



## thinkxingu (Oct 25, 2013)

Buddy has an EcoBoost and I'm not sold--the power's decent (though you should check out the turbo dump in high humidity issue) but the mileage is nowhere near what they claim.  I think the 5.0's are getting better mileage, there's no turbos to worry about, and they sound a lot better.  I loved my 2009 4.6 SuperCab.  Quiet, reliable, tight.  BUT, Ford's sheet metal blows--they ding WICKED easily.

Good luck.


----------



## festerw (Oct 25, 2013)

thinkxingu said:


> BUT, Ford's sheet metal blows--they ding WICKED easily.



They're all made out of old soda cans now, we've got a mix of all the big 3 at work and they all feel like you'll crush a bedside leaning on it.


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Oct 25, 2013)

Adios Pantalones said:


> Thanks, all. I think that cars/trucks of all sort are better at resisting body rot and maintaining value. Remember the 70's-80's, when every third car had major rot (at least in northern states)?  The trade off is that you need an engineering degree to work on them.
> I don't really need excessive power, so it sounds like any one would do


Iv had em all,worst was a 1999 toyotas tacoma rust bucket,couldnt haul squat.sheet metal paper thin lousy MPG and liked a lot of expensive parts. Best was and is chevy. My current wood hauler is a 1995 K2500 4x4 Ext cab. Hauls 3-4K in back and pulls 12K  almost 200000 on the clock and still looks and works like a new one.
Had 2 ford trucks ,they had a nice ride and not much else,but that was way back when, so i would not be afraid to bet on a newer one.


----------



## semipro (Oct 27, 2013)

Adios Pantalones said:


> I had a Baja. Great, ugly car- loved it!


We had its predecessor, the Brat.  It had two seats facing backwards in the bed.  
Fun to drive but when we had kids we couldn't see mounting a car seat in the bed.


----------



## Ashful (Oct 28, 2013)

semipro said:


> We had its predecessor, the Brat.  It had two seats facing backwards in the bed.
> Fun to drive but when we had kids we couldn't see mounting a car seat in the bed.


"How else are we going to turn that pudgy little toddler into a man?"

Nah... my wife wouldn't buy it, either.


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Oct 28, 2013)

The Baja had an actual back seat. It was just an Outback with the back-out. Of course, installing a jump seat would add to the excitement


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Sep 28, 2015)

Finally up and did it- brandy new XLT super cab. Loving it.


----------



## begreen (Sep 29, 2015)

Sweet! Congratulations.


----------



## BrotherBart (Sep 29, 2015)

Neighbor has one of those. Makes me want to throw rocks at my Suburban. The cab is like a living room.


----------



## begreen (Sep 29, 2015)

Is this with the new aluminum body? What engine does it have?


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Sep 29, 2015)

begreen said:


> Is this with the new aluminum body? What engine does it have?


Yup- aluminum body, and the smaller eco boost. I wont be towing the Queen Mary- it's got decent pickup for a pickup.

I was going to buy the base model- the xl- but after looking at the huge list of rebates, I got the XLT. The rebates only got better for this one! The finance guy was saying the list of rebates that they offer can be crazy.  You have a quarter Horse? You get a rebate for it.


----------



## begreen (Sep 29, 2015)

A friend has a couple year old F150 with the 6 cyl ecoboost. He has a Hallmark camper on it and says no problem with power.


----------



## jharkin (Sep 30, 2015)

Congrats adios...  Very nice truck! I think you could load my Tacoma into the bed 

. I've had a smile ever since I traded my Acura for the baby truck last year. I thought I'd miss the sporty drive but the utility factor and go anywhere feeling is so much better. You will love 'truckin.


----------

