On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 16:43:04 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:
"Capt John" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Aug 2, 7:14 pm, wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 22:57:25 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
On Thu, 2 Aug 2007 18:01:30 -0400, "JimH" ask wrote:
Chevy Silverado v. Toyota Tundra v. Ford F-150
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zShwG...%2F%2Fwww%2Emo...
http://tinyurl.com/24exwz
FORD RULES!!!
WHOO HOO!!!
Anybody with a socket wrench and five minutes could easily reverse the
outcome
of that dummied up test.
When Ford's start regularly going 200,000+ miles without anything besides
minor
routine maintenance, please let me know. That is NOT their present
reputation.
What exactly does pickup box bounce indicate, anyway? Maybe Ford needs to
do
some homework. It may be an advantage for the mighty oak tree to sway in
the
wind, rather than standing firm and breaking. Most competent engineers
know
that.
Your way off on that one. Ford's trucks are well known for being able
to take a beating, always have been. And lasting longer than anyone
else. Try beating the Toyota the same way, and you will end up getting
to know their service manager on a first name basis. Take a look
around, if the Toyota is so good, why are their none in any large
fleets that see heavy use? The fleet buyers know what Consumer Reports
doesn't. Their concerned about service life, value and cost of
ownership, their not concerned about resale values that are based on
someone's preception, they have to live in the real world, their jobs
depend on it. The Toyota's just fine for a home owner's trips to Home
Depot, or the guy that never hauls anything, but if it's going to get
abused on a regular basis, it'll end up a very expensive low milage
junker.
You forgot to post the source of your data for your claims about Toyota
trucks. Please do so right now.
Weren't you the one who said to take the truck talk elsewhere, which got
you the approval of HK?
Now, are you implying, by your request, that Toyota trucks are *not* good
for trips to Home Depot?
--
John H