"I am Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

I could never claim to be tall in a newsgroup where every second poster
claims to be 6' 4" and weighing 230 or so .................... but on
the other hand, if you stood me next to Scotty,

Always the troll, it's clear what Donnie is here for. Wonder if Harry
will condone this bull**** or if he will prove himself a hypocrite?



--
Rowdy Mouse Racing - Pain is temporary, Glory is forever!


Hey........ just sayin'.

On 1/6/11 3:13 PM, YukonBound wrote:


"Harryk" wrote in message
...
On 1/6/11 11:00 AM, YukonBound wrote:


"Harryk" wrote in message
...
On 1/3/11 11:49 PM, Tim wrote:
I haven't seen where smaller trucks are really that great of a savings
compared to their bigger counter parts, Especially if you plan on
really using them.

It depends on how you plan to use a truck. I no longer have a trailer
boat so I don't need a full-sized truck to tow a heavy boat. The
smaller trucks are...smaller...and therefore easier to park, easier to
maneuver, a little easier on the gas. Most of the time the "stuff" my
wife buys at the garden shops and other stores will easily fit into a
smaller truck. The other times, the "stuff" is too large for even a
full-size pickup truck.

I happened to park next to a new Toyota Tundra the other day, and
thought that truck was just humongous. I owned a Tundra some years
ago; it was significantly smaller than the current models.

The new trucks do seem way too big for a city dwelling weekend warrior.
I did have the Ranger for three years , but I have mixed feelings about
them.
I could never claim to be tall in a newsgroup where every second poster
claims to be 6' 4" and weighing 230 or so .................... but on
the other hand, if you stood me next to Scotty..................
anyway, they jack the Rangers up.. even the 2WD versions and seem to
compress the cab height so you have to sit in a lower seat that say, a
mini-van or even a RAV4.
I found the seat of firm foam uncomfortable for a couple of months and
even called the salesman to see if I could unload the Ranger and move up
to a F150.
He told me to wait and the foam would conform to my shape.. and he was
mostly right.
If I was in the market today, I'd take advantage of the great sales Ford
has been offering and try to find a short wheelbase regular cab F150.
(6.5 foot box).
That's all I would need the vast majority of the time and I could always
put a cap over the box to accommodate the dog.


I had a Ranger and an F150. Both were good trucks, as was my Tundra.
I've eliminated the Chrysler and GM small trucks; they don't do much
for me. That leaves Toyota and Ford, I guess. I need to take a test
drive in the Toyota Tacoma 4x4 small truck.

I sat in the Tacoma cab while having my RAV4 serviced and found that the
windshield cut off too low. I felt like the roof was caving in on
me..... and the seating is low, similar to the Ranger. Too bad that
Honda Ridgeline is so expensive. It might be a good choice for a light,
mid-sized pickup.

Hmmm. I haven't looked at a Honda or its pricing... :)

In article ,
says...

"I am Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

I could never claim to be tall in a newsgroup where every second poster
claims to be 6' 4" and weighing 230 or so .................... but on
the other hand, if you stood me next to Scotty,

Always the troll, it's clear what Donnie is here for. Wonder if Harry
will condone this bull**** or if he will prove himself a hypocrite?



--
Rowdy Mouse Racing - Pain is temporary, Glory is forever!


Hey........ just sayin'.

Don't worry little buddy, I'll condone your name calling and insulting
because I like the feel of your nose in my ass. I just call out those
who don't agree with me or believe my lies.

"Harryk" wrote in message
...
On 1/6/11 3:13 PM, YukonBound wrote:


"Harryk" wrote in message
...
On 1/6/11 11:00 AM, YukonBound wrote:


"Harryk" wrote in message
...
On 1/3/11 11:49 PM, Tim wrote:
I haven't seen where smaller trucks are really that great of a
savings
compared to their bigger counter parts, Especially if you plan on
really using them.

It depends on how you plan to use a truck. I no longer have a trailer
boat so I don't need a full-sized truck to tow a heavy boat. The
smaller trucks are...smaller...and therefore easier to park, easier to
maneuver, a little easier on the gas. Most of the time the "stuff" my
wife buys at the garden shops and other stores will easily fit into a
smaller truck. The other times, the "stuff" is too large for even a
full-size pickup truck.

I happened to park next to a new Toyota Tundra the other day, and
thought that truck was just humongous. I owned a Tundra some years
ago; it was significantly smaller than the current models.

The new trucks do seem way too big for a city dwelling weekend warrior.
I did have the Ranger for three years , but I have mixed feelings about
them.
I could never claim to be tall in a newsgroup where every second poster
claims to be 6' 4" and weighing 230 or so .................... but on
the other hand, if you stood me next to Scotty..................
anyway, they jack the Rangers up.. even the 2WD versions and seem to
compress the cab height so you have to sit in a lower seat that say, a
mini-van or even a RAV4.
I found the seat of firm foam uncomfortable for a couple of months and
even called the salesman to see if I could unload the Ranger and move
up
to a F150.
He told me to wait and the foam would conform to my shape.. and he was
mostly right.
If I was in the market today, I'd take advantage of the great sales
Ford
has been offering and try to find a short wheelbase regular cab F150.
(6.5 foot box).
That's all I would need the vast majority of the time and I could
always
put a cap over the box to accommodate the dog.


I had a Ranger and an F150. Both were good trucks, as was my Tundra.
I've eliminated the Chrysler and GM small trucks; they don't do much
for me. That leaves Toyota and Ford, I guess. I need to take a test
drive in the Toyota Tacoma 4x4 small truck.

I sat in the Tacoma cab while having my RAV4 serviced and found that the
windshield cut off too low. I felt like the roof was caving in on
me..... and the seating is low, similar to the Ranger. Too bad that
Honda Ridgeline is so expensive. It might be a good choice for a light,
mid-sized pickup.

Hmmm. I haven't looked at a Honda or its pricing... :)

Consumer Reports seems to like it...
here's some of their online report...

"Honda RidgelinePhotosVideo

Base MSRP price range:$28,900 - $36,830 HighsRide, handling, powertrain,
rear seat, access, in-bed trunk, dual-action tailgate, crash-test results,
composite bed, reliability. LowsRoad noise, towing capacity, turning circle.
See our user reviewsAlready own it? Write a reviewCar Type: Compact pickup
trucksCR overall score
Honda's pickup truck has agile handling and a ride that's supple and
steady. The tailgate opens vertically or horizontally, and beneath the bed
is an all-weather, lockable trunk. The 3.5-liter V6 is quiet, smooth, and
responsive. Road noise is pronounced. The roomy crew cab is nicely detailed
and easy to access. The five-foot-long cargo bed has no wheel-arch intrusion
and is made of composite material. While not designed for serious
off-roading, the Ridgeline is capable in mild off-road conditions and it can
tow 5,000 pounds

Realibility, ride, owner satisfaction and acceleration are all better than
average but fuel economy is worse.

"YukonBound" wrote in message
...



"Harryk" wrote in message
...
On 1/3/11 11:49 PM, Tim wrote:
I haven't seen where smaller trucks are really that great of a savings
compared to their bigger counter parts, Especially if you plan on
really using them.

It depends on how you plan to use a truck. I no longer have a trailer boat
so I don't need a full-sized truck to tow a heavy boat. The smaller trucks
are...smaller...and therefore easier to park, easier to maneuver, a little
easier on the gas. Most of the time the "stuff" my wife buys at the garden
shops and other stores will easily fit into a smaller truck. The other
times, the "stuff" is too large for even a full-size pickup truck.

I happened to park next to a new Toyota Tundra the other day, and thought
that truck was just humongous. I owned a Tundra some years ago; it was
significantly smaller than the current models.

The new trucks do seem way too big for a city dwelling weekend warrior.
I did have the Ranger for three years , but I have mixed feelings about
them.
I could never claim to be tall in a newsgroup where every second poster
claims to be 6' 4" and weighing 230 or so .................... but on the
other hand, if you stood me next to Scotty..................
anyway, they jack the Rangers up.. even the 2WD versions and seem to
compress the cab height so you have to sit in a lower seat that say, a
mini-van or even a RAV4.
I found the seat of firm foam uncomfortable for a couple of months and even
called the salesman to see if I could unload the Ranger and move up to a
F150.
He told me to wait and the foam would conform to my shape.. and he was
mostly right.
If I was in the market today, I'd take advantage of the great sales Ford has
been offering and try to find a short wheelbase regular cab F150. (6.5 foot
box).
That's all I would need the vast majority of the time and I could always put
a cap over the box to accommodate the dog.


Reply:
Son in law has an older Tundra. Nice size truck. I drove it about 500
miles. Ride and driving did not impress me. Sloppy steering and truck did
not give a solid feel. Felt like lots of road steer. My 1989 s-10 extended
cab was a nice size truck for most city people. Hauled just about every
thing you needed to haul as a home owner. I love my 2004 Crew cab, short
bed diesel Chevy 2500. Comfortable, decent mileage. 19 mpg no towing and
driving 80 mph to Los Angeles. 14 towing a 3300# boat and trailer with a
1500# pop-up camper. Drawbacks? Takes huge area to turn around in and
large parking spaces. Newer Tundra's seem to be oversized, poor mileage
from the people I have talked to. Seems as if most of the trucks are
supersized these days. The Tacoma would be the small truck I would get
today if not towing or hauling a camper. Is a nice size unit. Was looking
at an F-100 Ford the other day driving down the road. Seemed to be about
the same size as the Tacoma. And the F-100 was a popular truck for a lot of
years.

wrote in message ...

On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 19:37:29 -0400, "YukonBound"
wrote:

Hmmm. I haven't looked at a Honda or its pricing... :)

Consumer Reports seems to like it...
here's some of their online report...

"Honda RidgelinePhotosVideo

Base MSRP price range:$28,900 - $36,830 HighsRide, handling, powertrain,
rear seat, access, in-bed trunk, dual-action tailgate, crash-test results,
composite bed, reliability. LowsRoad noise, towing capacity, turning
circle.
See our user reviewsAlready own it? Write a reviewCar Type: Compact pickup
trucksCR overall score
Honda's pickup truck has agile handling and a ride that's supple and
steady. The tailgate opens vertically or horizontally, and beneath the bed
is an all-weather, lockable trunk. The 3.5-liter V6 is quiet, smooth, and
responsive. Road noise is pronounced. The roomy crew cab is nicely detailed
and easy to access. The five-foot-long cargo bed has no wheel-arch
intrusion
and is made of composite material. While not designed for serious
off-roading, the Ridgeline is capable in mild off-road conditions and it
can
tow 5,000 pounds

Realibility, ride, owner satisfaction and acceleration are all better than
average but fuel economy is worse.

We looked at a Ridgeline a while ago. It is basically the Odyssey with
a pickup looking body. The road noise thing is typical of all Hondas.
We have had 3 (Accord, CRV and my Prelude) and they all sound like you
are running cheap snow tires.
This is still a car with a truck like body. You can't confuse it with
a real truck.
It is similar to the GM Aztec


Not the Aztec. The car that made a Pacer look good. I do agree with it
being a car and not a truck. I think any of the units with a 5' bed are not
really trucks.

On Jan 6, 12:39*pm, "MMC" wrote:

The Land Rover 110 used to be the hot ticket but the Toyotas are a lot more
dependable and handle a lot better.


The old one liner:

"Did you hear about the guy that bought a new Land Rover and it didn't
leak any oil so he kept taking it back and hounding the dealer till
they got it right?"

On Jan 6, 6:51*pm, wrote:
On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 19:37:29 -0400, "YukonBound"



wrote:
Hmmm. I haven't looked at a Honda or its pricing... *:)

Consumer Reports seems to like it...
here's some of their online report...

"Honda RidgelinePhotosVideo

Base MSRP price range:$28,900 - $36,830 HighsRide, handling, powertrain,
rear seat, access, in-bed trunk, dual-action tailgate, crash-test results,
composite bed, reliability. LowsRoad noise, towing capacity, turning circle.
See our user reviewsAlready own it? Write a reviewCar Type: Compact pickup
trucksCR overall score
Honda's pickup truck has agile handling and a ride that's supple and
steady. The tailgate opens vertically or horizontally, and beneath the bed
is an all-weather, lockable trunk. The 3.5-liter V6 is quiet, smooth, and
responsive. Road noise is pronounced. The roomy crew cab is nicely detailed
and easy to access. The five-foot-long cargo bed has no wheel-arch intrusion
and is made of composite material. While not designed for serious
off-roading, the Ridgeline is capable in mild off-road conditions and it can
tow 5,000 pounds

Realibility, ride, owner satisfaction and acceleration are all better than
average but fuel economy is worse.

We looked at a Ridgeline a while ago. It is basically the Odyssey with
a pickup looking body. The road noise thing is typical of all Hondas.
We have had 3 (Accord, CRV and my Prelude) and they all sound like you
are running cheap snow tires.


Really?

My wife just bought a 2009 CRV and even though I'm really nit
impressed with the ride (I'm biased, I drive large float-mobiles), I
thought it was pretty quiet. and it gets about 30 mpg. highway...

On 1/6/11 10:25 PM, I am Tosk wrote:


I still hate front wheel drive.. Just doesn't make sense to have the
steering and drive on the same axle,

Please explain.

On 1/7/11 7:53 AM, I am Tosk wrote:
In , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 1/6/11 10:25 PM, I am Tosk wrote:


I still hate front wheel drive.. Just doesn't make sense to have the
steering and drive on the same axle,

Please explain.

Pffftttt...


Yeah, I kinda figured *that* was the lack of thought underpinning your
absurd statement, "Just doesn't make sense to have the steering and
drive on the same axle." Fortunately, Alec Issigonis wouldn't have paid
any attention to you back then, and no automotive engineer would pay any
attention to you today. But, hey, go ahead...go through life wallowing
in your ignorance.