On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 16:41:54 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 2 Aug 2007 22:50:23 -0700, "Mike" wrote:

You want a review of the Ram... ok.

My 1st in 1984 (1/2 ton, 2wd) went 130,000 with nothing other than an
electronic ignition module that went bad at about 50,000. I replaced it
with
a standard vacuum advance, and it was good 'till I traded it on a 1990
(3/4
ton, 4wd). The 1990 had the tranny go south at 60,000 but was replaced
under
warantee, and was problem free till I traded it on a '95 at about 100k.
The
'95 (3/4 ton, 4wd, extended cab) was absolutely problem free until I
traded
it on my current Dodge... an '03. The '95 had about 150k on it at the
time.
So far, the '03 (3/4 ton, 4wd, crew cab, hemi) has not had a single
problem
other than normal stuff (brakes, tune-up, etc) as with the other trucks.
I've only got about 50k on it right now. Until Dodge gives me a reason to
go
elsewhere, it's the truck for me.

--Mike


To someone who owns Toyotas, the above sounds like a series of lemons. Why
would
you be replacing trannies and ignition systems at 50-60k? And why was the
original ignition system not replaced with the same thing as the original?
Did
someone tell you it would probably fail again?

I owned a 64 Dodge Dart convertible with a slant 6 that was pretty good. I
think
it must have been a very different company back then.




A large segment of the buying public was (and probably still is) willing to
pretend that a short life span is normal for certain car brands. Cars are a
unique product category in this regard.


You forgot to post the source of your data for your claims about the buying
public. Please do so right now.
--
John H

On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 17:01:26 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
news
On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 16:43:04 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Capt John" wrote in message
groups.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

I just want the source of data to back up the various claims he made in the
paragraph beginning with "Your way off...".


I just want to know if you were the one who was just admonishing me, with
Harry's approval, of course, for participating in a truck discussion on
rec.boats.

Is Harry's approval important to you?
--
John H

On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 17:00:41 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 16:41:54 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 2 Aug 2007 22:50:23 -0700, "Mike" wrote:

You want a review of the Ram... ok.

My 1st in 1984 (1/2 ton, 2wd) went 130,000 with nothing other than an
electronic ignition module that went bad at about 50,000. I replaced it
with
a standard vacuum advance, and it was good 'till I traded it on a 1990
(3/4
ton, 4wd). The 1990 had the tranny go south at 60,000 but was replaced
under
warantee, and was problem free till I traded it on a '95 at about 100k.
The
'95 (3/4 ton, 4wd, extended cab) was absolutely problem free until I
traded
it on my current Dodge... an '03. The '95 had about 150k on it at the
time.
So far, the '03 (3/4 ton, 4wd, crew cab, hemi) has not had a single
problem
other than normal stuff (brakes, tune-up, etc) as with the other trucks.
I've only got about 50k on it right now. Until Dodge gives me a reason
to
go
elsewhere, it's the truck for me.

--Mike


To someone who owns Toyotas, the above sounds like a series of lemons.
Why
would
you be replacing trannies and ignition systems at 50-60k? And why was
the
original ignition system not replaced with the same thing as the
original?
Did
someone tell you it would probably fail again?

I owned a 64 Dodge Dart convertible with a slant 6 that was pretty good.
I
think
it must have been a very different company back then.




A large segment of the buying public was (and probably still is) willing
to
pretend that a short life span is normal for certain car brands. Cars are
a
unique product category in this regard.


You forgot to post the source of your data for your claims about the
buying
public. Please do so right now.
--
John H

Interviews, and blindly loyal comments from people who think replacing a
tranny at 60k miles is normal.


That is a hell of a source.
--
John H

On Aug 3, 2:59 pm, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 17:19:26 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"





wrote:
"John H." wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 17:00:41 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 16:41:54 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

wrote in message
om...
On Thu, 2 Aug 2007 22:50:23 -0700, "Mike" wrote:

You want a review of the Ram... ok.

My 1st in 1984 (1/2 ton, 2wd) went 130,000 with nothing other than an
electronic ignition module that went bad at about 50,000. I replaced
it
with
a standard vacuum advance, and it was good 'till I traded it on a 1990
(3/4
ton, 4wd). The 1990 had the tranny go south at 60,000 but was replaced
under
warantee, and was problem free till I traded it on a '95 at about
100k.
The
'95 (3/4 ton, 4wd, extended cab) was absolutely problem free until I
traded
it on my current Dodge... an '03. The '95 had about 150k on it at the
time.
So far, the '03 (3/4 ton, 4wd, crew cab, hemi) has not had a single
problem
other than normal stuff (brakes, tune-up, etc) as with the other
trucks.
I've only got about 50k on it right now. Until Dodge gives me a reason
to
go
elsewhere, it's the truck for me.

--Mike

To someone who owns Toyotas, the above sounds like a series of lemons.
Why
would
you be replacing trannies and ignition systems at 50-60k? And why was
the
original ignition system not replaced with the same thing as the
original?
Did
someone tell you it would probably fail again?

I owned a 64 Dodge Dart convertible with a slant 6 that was pretty
good.
I
think
it must have been a very different company back then.

A large segment of the buying public was (and probably still is) willing
to
pretend that a short life span is normal for certain car brands. Cars
are
a
unique product category in this regard.

You forgot to post the source of your data for your claims about the
buying
public. Please do so right now.
--
John H

Interviews, and blindly loyal comments from people who think replacing a
tranny at 60k miles is normal.

That is a hell of a source.
--
John H

Oh? You'd be more impressed if a magazine author got the same information by
speaking to the same kinds of people, and then reported it to you? I don't
need intermediaries.

Perhaps Capt John needed none either.
--
John H- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You really need to stop making an idiot out of this guy

On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 17:19:26 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 17:00:41 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 16:41:54 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

wrote in message
om...
On Thu, 2 Aug 2007 22:50:23 -0700, "Mike" wrote:

You want a review of the Ram... ok.

My 1st in 1984 (1/2 ton, 2wd) went 130,000 with nothing other than an
electronic ignition module that went bad at about 50,000. I replaced
it
with
a standard vacuum advance, and it was good 'till I traded it on a 1990
(3/4
ton, 4wd). The 1990 had the tranny go south at 60,000 but was replaced
under
warantee, and was problem free till I traded it on a '95 at about
100k.
The
'95 (3/4 ton, 4wd, extended cab) was absolutely problem free until I
traded
it on my current Dodge... an '03. The '95 had about 150k on it at the
time.
So far, the '03 (3/4 ton, 4wd, crew cab, hemi) has not had a single
problem
other than normal stuff (brakes, tune-up, etc) as with the other
trucks.
I've only got about 50k on it right now. Until Dodge gives me a reason
to
go
elsewhere, it's the truck for me.

--Mike


To someone who owns Toyotas, the above sounds like a series of lemons.
Why
would
you be replacing trannies and ignition systems at 50-60k? And why was
the
original ignition system not replaced with the same thing as the
original?
Did
someone tell you it would probably fail again?

I owned a 64 Dodge Dart convertible with a slant 6 that was pretty
good.
I
think
it must have been a very different company back then.




A large segment of the buying public was (and probably still is) willing
to
pretend that a short life span is normal for certain car brands. Cars
are
a
unique product category in this regard.


You forgot to post the source of your data for your claims about the
buying
public. Please do so right now.
--
John H

Interviews, and blindly loyal comments from people who think replacing a
tranny at 60k miles is normal.


That is a hell of a source.
--
John H

Oh? You'd be more impressed if a magazine author got the same information by
speaking to the same kinds of people, and then reported it to you? I don't
need intermediaries.


Perhaps Capt John needed none either.
--
John H

On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 18:28:16 -0000, wrote:

On Aug 3, 2:59 pm, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 17:19:26 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"





wrote:
"John H." wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 17:00:41 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 16:41:54 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

wrote in message
om...
On Thu, 2 Aug 2007 22:50:23 -0700, "Mike" wrote:

You want a review of the Ram... ok.

My 1st in 1984 (1/2 ton, 2wd) went 130,000 with nothing other than an
electronic ignition module that went bad at about 50,000. I replaced
it
with
a standard vacuum advance, and it was good 'till I traded it on a 1990
(3/4
ton, 4wd). The 1990 had the tranny go south at 60,000 but was replaced
under
warantee, and was problem free till I traded it on a '95 at about
100k.
The
'95 (3/4 ton, 4wd, extended cab) was absolutely problem free until I
traded
it on my current Dodge... an '03. The '95 had about 150k on it at the
time.
So far, the '03 (3/4 ton, 4wd, crew cab, hemi) has not had a single
problem
other than normal stuff (brakes, tune-up, etc) as with the other
trucks.
I've only got about 50k on it right now. Until Dodge gives me a reason
to
go
elsewhere, it's the truck for me.

--Mike

To someone who owns Toyotas, the above sounds like a series of lemons.
Why
would
you be replacing trannies and ignition systems at 50-60k? And why was
the
original ignition system not replaced with the same thing as the
original?
Did
someone tell you it would probably fail again?

I owned a 64 Dodge Dart convertible with a slant 6 that was pretty
good.
I
think
it must have been a very different company back then.

A large segment of the buying public was (and probably still is) willing
to
pretend that a short life span is normal for certain car brands. Cars
are
a
unique product category in this regard.

You forgot to post the source of your data for your claims about the
buying
public. Please do so right now.
--
John H

Interviews, and blindly loyal comments from people who think replacing a
tranny at 60k miles is normal.

That is a hell of a source.
--
John H

Oh? You'd be more impressed if a magazine author got the same information by
speaking to the same kinds of people, and then reported it to you? I don't
need intermediaries.

Perhaps Capt John needed none either.
--
John H- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You really need to stop making an idiot out of this guy

He loves it. And he needs the attention from folks like Harry. That's why
he won't visit 'a.politics' and converse in an appropriate group.
--
John H

So....johnny boy...when there are no OT posts for you to pounce on, how do
you stay busy? Cleaning the lint trap on your dryer?

On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 19:52:06 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

So....johnny boy...when there are no OT posts for you to pounce on, how do
you stay busy? Cleaning the lint trap on your dryer?


Hit your 'Get new headers' button.

For this kind of discussion, 'a.politics' would be very appropriate.

BTW, what do you think of this for use on Falls Lake and other NC lakes?

http://capehornboats.com/oldsite/boat17.htm

Maybe it could get used in some salt water, bays and sounds, also.
--
John H

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 2 Aug 2007 20:33:44 -0400, "JimH" ask wrote:

Perhaps this thread can result in some unbiased reviews based on
experiences
with the Ford F-150, Chevy Silveraldo and Toyota Tundra.

Let's put it this way, if you want my Tundra you will have to pry it
out of my cold dead hands.

It's a great truck - rides well, quiet, nicely finished, reliable,
half-way decent fuel economy (for a V8 gas truck).

I just read the Sept. '07 Consumers Reports and they did a review on pickup
trucks.

Their comments:

Toyota Tundra
Highs - Powertrain, telescoping steering wheel, standard ESC, towing,
tailgate
Lows - Ride, visibility, braking, long reach to some contros, ESC disengaing
in 4WD.
Black marks - Emergency handling, braking
Base price $31,160
As tested $34,738 w/ SR5 trim line, 5.7 liter V-8, 6 speed automatic 4WD


Chevy Silverado 1500
Highs - Ride, access, ESC, selectable full-time 4WD, powertrain,
payload/towing capability
Lows - Braking, turning circle, ride
Black marks - Emergency handling, braking
Base price $34,940
As tested $37,235 w/LT trim line, 5.3 liter vV-8, 4 speed automatic, 4WD

Ford F-150
Highs - Cargo space, payload/towing capability, rear seat space
Lows - Braking, ride, front-seat comfort, handling, acceleration, turning
circle, engine noise, no full-time 4WD or ESC, reliability
Black marks - Emergency handling, braking, ride, rear crash test
Base price $32,565
As tested $36,705 w/XLT trim line, 5.4 liter V-8, 4 speed automatic , 4WD

Dodge Ram 1500
Highs - Acceleration, full-time 4WD, available ESC, towing capability, rear
seat space
Lows - Braking, ride, seat comfort, fit and finish, handling, acceleration,
turning circle
Black marks - Emergency handling, braking, ride, rear seat comfort, access,
rear crash test
Base price $31,220
As tested $38,370 w/SLT trim line, 5.7 liter V-8, 5 speed automatic, 4WD.

Their pick - Toyota Tundra

I have to admit that Consumer Reports has a thing for Toyotas as they are
always recommended by them.

JimH wrote:
"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 2 Aug 2007 20:33:44 -0400, "JimH" ask wrote:

Perhaps this thread can result in some unbiased reviews based on
experiences
with the Ford F-150, Chevy Silveraldo and Toyota Tundra.
Let's put it this way, if you want my Tundra you will have to pry it
out of my cold dead hands.

It's a great truck - rides well, quiet, nicely finished, reliable,
half-way decent fuel economy (for a V8 gas truck).

I just read the Sept. '07 Consumers Reports and they did a review on pickup
trucks.

Their comments:

Toyota Tundra
Highs - Powertrain, telescoping steering wheel, standard ESC, towing,
tailgate
Lows - Ride, visibility, braking, long reach to some contros, ESC disengaing
in 4WD.
Black marks - Emergency handling, braking
Base price $31,160
As tested $34,738 w/ SR5 trim line, 5.7 liter V-8, 6 speed automatic 4WD


Chevy Silverado 1500
Highs - Ride, access, ESC, selectable full-time 4WD, powertrain,
payload/towing capability
Lows - Braking, turning circle, ride
Black marks - Emergency handling, braking
Base price $34,940
As tested $37,235 w/LT trim line, 5.3 liter vV-8, 4 speed automatic, 4WD

Ford F-150
Highs - Cargo space, payload/towing capability, rear seat space
Lows - Braking, ride, front-seat comfort, handling, acceleration, turning
circle, engine noise, no full-time 4WD or ESC, reliability
Black marks - Emergency handling, braking, ride, rear crash test
Base price $32,565
As tested $36,705 w/XLT trim line, 5.4 liter V-8, 4 speed automatic , 4WD

Dodge Ram 1500
Highs - Acceleration, full-time 4WD, available ESC, towing capability, rear
seat space
Lows - Braking, ride, seat comfort, fit and finish, handling, acceleration,
turning circle
Black marks - Emergency handling, braking, ride, rear seat comfort, access,
rear crash test
Base price $31,220
As tested $38,370 w/SLT trim line, 5.7 liter V-8, 5 speed automatic, 4WD.

Their pick - Toyota Tundra

I have to admit that Consumer Reports has a thing for Toyotas as they are
always recommended by them.




What's ESC?

BTW, I owned a ford f150 (modern style, with the V8), and a recent
vintage tundra. The ford was fine, but the tundra was far more refined.