|
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
Chevy Silverado v. Toyota Tundra v. Ford F-150
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zShwG...33643p1%2Ehtml http://tinyurl.com/24exwz |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
|
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
wrote in message ... 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...33643p1%2Ehtml 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. You must be a Tundra owner. ;-) |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
|
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
wrote in message ... On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 23:27:02 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: 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. You must be a Tundra owner. ;-) Of course he is - it's pretty obvious. He'd rather pay $47,000 for a Tundra that will shake it'self apart than a Ford which at $34,000 won't. Heh, heh, heh... You are wrong on all counts. I don't own a Tundra. However Fords do not have a very good reputation for living a long life without major repairs. They are crap, plain and simple. Is the Toyota perfect? Far from it. It's still a hell of a lot better than any current Ford. To compare them for quality is laughable. Really laughable. Total cost of ownership from beginning to end of usable life makes the Toyota half the price of the Ford or better. You are a sucker for initial low price. PT Barnum knew all about you.. We own a Toyota Highlander and could not be happier with it. Does that mean the Tundra is of equal quality? Hmm....... I will be purchasing a pickup in the near future and have narrowed my choice to the three that were tested in the link I orignally provided. I am not a Dodge or Nissan fan. I thought the bed stability test was a good example of the finish quality between these 3 trucks and was a start for me to compare the 3. Whether or not a simple tightening of nuts with a socket wrench can fix the problem highlighted by the test is debatable at this point..........the main point is that the trucks were tested as rolled out by the factories. I know brand loyalty is important to some...........I am looking to move past that. Perhaps this thread can result in some unbiased reviews based on experiences with the Ford F-150, Chevy Silveraldo and Toyota Tundra. Heck, reviews of the Dodge Ram and Nissan Titan pickups are also welcome. ;-) |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
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). |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
|
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
Tell you what old bean - I've owned Fords since college - 40 years ago. All of them went over 150,000 with nary a hitch. Sucker this, Barnum Boy. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyC6v...elated&search= -; |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
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 "JimH" ask wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 23:27:02 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: 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. You must be a Tundra owner. ;-) Of course he is - it's pretty obvious. He'd rather pay $47,000 for a Tundra that will shake it'self apart than a Ford which at $34,000 won't. Heh, heh, heh... You are wrong on all counts. I don't own a Tundra. However Fords do not have a very good reputation for living a long life without major repairs. They are crap, plain and simple. Is the Toyota perfect? Far from it. It's still a hell of a lot better than any current Ford. To compare them for quality is laughable. Really laughable. Total cost of ownership from beginning to end of usable life makes the Toyota half the price of the Ford or better. You are a sucker for initial low price. PT Barnum knew all about you.. We own a Toyota Highlander and could not be happier with it. Does that mean the Tundra is of equal quality? Hmm....... I will be purchasing a pickup in the near future and have narrowed my choice to the three that were tested in the link I orignally provided. I am not a Dodge or Nissan fan. I thought the bed stability test was a good example of the finish quality between these 3 trucks and was a start for me to compare the 3. Whether or not a simple tightening of nuts with a socket wrench can fix the problem highlighted by the test is debatable at this point..........the main point is that the trucks were tested as rolled out by the factories. I know brand loyalty is important to some...........I am looking to move past that. Perhaps this thread can result in some unbiased reviews based on experiences with the Ford F-150, Chevy Silveraldo and Toyota Tundra. Heck, reviews of the Dodge Ram and Nissan Titan pickups are also welcome. ;-) |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
Wayne.B wrote:
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). According to MSN Auto, the User rating places Ford F-150 #1, with a 7.7, the Ram w/ 7.6 and Tundra w/ 7.3. Consumer Reports rated the old Tundra their number 1 rated truck. Edmunds and Car Connection rates the F-150 the best rated used truck to buy, while Consumer Reports rates the Toyota as the best used truck to buy. It is obvious, that the only thing everyone can agree on, is don't buy a GM truck. |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
"-rick-" wrote in message
. .. Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Tell you what old bean - I've owned Fords since college - 40 years ago. All of them went over 150,000 with nary a hitch. Sucker this, Barnum Boy. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyC6v...elated&search= -; Now, that's funny. |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
"John H." wrote in message
... On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 07:47:39 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote: Wayne.B wrote: 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). According to MSN Auto, the User rating places Ford F-150 #1, with a 7.7, the Ram w/ 7.6 and Tundra w/ 7.3. Consumer Reports rated the old Tundra their number 1 rated truck. Edmunds and Car Connection rates the F-150 the best rated used truck to buy, while Consumer Reports rates the Toyota as the best used truck to buy. It is obvious, that the only thing everyone can agree on, is don't buy a GM truck. No, GMC owners don't need to brag about their truck to feel good about their purchase. They just do. -- John H Take it to an automotive newsgroup, diaper boy. |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"John H." wrote in message ... On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 07:47:39 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote: Wayne.B wrote: 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). According to MSN Auto, the User rating places Ford F-150 #1, with a 7.7, the Ram w/ 7.6 and Tundra w/ 7.3. Consumer Reports rated the old Tundra their number 1 rated truck. Edmunds and Car Connection rates the F-150 the best rated used truck to buy, while Consumer Reports rates the Toyota as the best used truck to buy. It is obvious, that the only thing everyone can agree on, is don't buy a GM truck. No, GMC owners don't need to brag about their truck to feel good about their purchase. They just do. -- John H Take it to an automotive newsgroup, diaper boy. :} |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
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. So.. is it a guy with a wrench or advanced engineering that make the thing a limp as JSB's.... ?? You can't have it both ways you know. Besides your Mighty Oak reference is useless, different tool, different job, different enginering. My hammer has an oak handle, and if it was a limp as that truck body, I would not get much work done. Personally, ladder frame and all, If I am crawling though the trails, or even carrying a generator across the lot, I want a stiff frame, I want to know exactly where the tires are all the time. We used to do a lot or four wheeling, mostly woods and trails (no sand) and the last thing I would want is that kind of ride. The ford looked like Callaway active suspension there, you could almost drink a cup of coffee. BTW, I like Jeeps, and almost anything GMC. Dad is a Ford man and his 1983 ran till we sold it in 94 to a guy for a farm truck, still going strong, er, the part that's not rusted;) |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
On Aug 3, 11:58 am, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 13:59:33 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "John H." wrote in message .. . On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 07:47:39 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote: Wayne.B wrote: 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). According to MSN Auto, the User rating places Ford F-150 #1, with a 7.7, the Ram w/ 7.6 and Tundra w/ 7.3. Consumer Reports rated the old Tundra their number 1 rated truck. Edmunds and Car Connection rates the F-150 the best rated used truck to buy, while Consumer Reports rates the Toyota as the best used truck to buy. It is obvious, that the only thing everyone can agree on, is don't buy a GM truck. No, GMC owners don't need to brag about their truck to feel good about their purchase. They just do. -- John H Take it to an automotive newsgroup, diaper boy. That's a good idea, except that we're discussing the prime movers for a lot of towed boats. Now, if you had one that needed towing, you'd understand why the subject is appropriate for this group. Does name-calling put you in the exalted Harry Krause category? -- John H- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - BURN!!! |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 07:47:39 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote: Wayne.B wrote: 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). According to MSN Auto, the User rating places Ford F-150 #1, with a 7.7, the Ram w/ 7.6 and Tundra w/ 7.3. Consumer Reports rated the old Tundra their number 1 rated truck. Edmunds and Car Connection rates the F-150 the best rated used truck to buy, while Consumer Reports rates the Toyota as the best used truck to buy. It is obvious, that the only thing everyone can agree on, is don't buy a GM truck. No, GMC owners don't need to brag about their truck to feel good about their purchase. They just do. -- John H |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
"John H." wrote in message
... On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 13:59:33 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "John H." wrote in message . .. On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 07:47:39 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote: Wayne.B wrote: 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). According to MSN Auto, the User rating places Ford F-150 #1, with a 7.7, the Ram w/ 7.6 and Tundra w/ 7.3. Consumer Reports rated the old Tundra their number 1 rated truck. Edmunds and Car Connection rates the F-150 the best rated used truck to buy, while Consumer Reports rates the Toyota as the best used truck to buy. It is obvious, that the only thing everyone can agree on, is don't buy a GM truck. No, GMC owners don't need to brag about their truck to feel good about their purchase. They just do. -- John H Take it to an automotive newsgroup, diaper boy. That's a good idea, except that we're discussing the prime movers for a lot of towed boats. Now, if you had one that needed towing, you'd understand why the subject is appropriate for this group. Does name-calling put you in the exalted Harry Krause category? -- John H Take it to an automotive newsgroup. |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 13:59:33 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote: "John H." wrote in message .. . On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 07:47:39 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote: Wayne.B wrote: 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). According to MSN Auto, the User rating places Ford F-150 #1, with a 7.7, the Ram w/ 7.6 and Tundra w/ 7.3. Consumer Reports rated the old Tundra their number 1 rated truck. Edmunds and Car Connection rates the F-150 the best rated used truck to buy, while Consumer Reports rates the Toyota as the best used truck to buy. It is obvious, that the only thing everyone can agree on, is don't buy a GM truck. No, GMC owners don't need to brag about their truck to feel good about their purchase. They just do. -- John H Take it to an automotive newsgroup, diaper boy. That's a good idea, except that we're discussing the prime movers for a lot of towed boats. Now, if you had one that needed towing, you'd understand why the subject is appropriate for this group. Does name-calling put you in the exalted Harry Krause category? -- John H |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 10:27:28 -0400, HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "John H." wrote in message ... On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 07:47:39 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote: Wayne.B wrote: 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). According to MSN Auto, the User rating places Ford F-150 #1, with a 7.7, the Ram w/ 7.6 and Tundra w/ 7.3. Consumer Reports rated the old Tundra their number 1 rated truck. Edmunds and Car Connection rates the F-150 the best rated used truck to buy, while Consumer Reports rates the Toyota as the best used truck to buy. It is obvious, that the only thing everyone can agree on, is don't buy a GM truck. No, GMC owners don't need to brag about their truck to feel good about their purchase. They just do. -- John H Take it to an automotive newsgroup, diaper boy. :} Wow, Doug, you got Harry's approval! Now *that* has to really make your day! -- John H |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
Why would you be replacing trannies
Hey, sh*t happens, and I can accept that. Like I said, it was replaced under warantee... no problem. The ignition was replaced with a vacuum advance, 'cause that kit was $150, and the new module was $250. I didn't have the extra money to spend, and I did the work myself. Lemons, my a** --Mike 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. |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
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. My last Ford van I bought about 15 years ago, it was a fleet van, my brother in law was the fleet director, it had over 150,000 miles on it (odomiter didn't work), it was about 7 or 8 years old. We did everything with it, hauled boats, fish, a load of copper, building materials, you name it, it did it. We didn't pay much for it, I figured I'd just drive it into the ground. I changed the oil once, never tuned it, rarely added oil to it. Ran that thing for 10 years, the body had real bad rust (probably from hoseing it out after hauling fish), God only knows how many miles it had on it, it just refused to die. I finally junked it when the rust got so bad you had to watch where you walked in the back. Motor ran fine, transmission was perfect when I turned it in. The junk yard guy told me their wasn't much need for the engines and transmissions, they never go. My brother in law said that was the reason they bought only Ford vans and trucks, they held up. He said they wouldn't even think about any other brand. You've got to go with what you know! |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
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. |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
"Capt John" wrote in message
ups.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. |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
"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. |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
"John H." wrote in message
... On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 16:43:04 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "Capt John" wrote in message roups.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...". |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
"John H." wrote in message
... On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 17:01:26 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "John H." wrote in message . .. On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 16:43:04 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "Capt John" wrote in message egroups.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 Your "Harry's approval" delusional is exactly that. I can't stop Harry from being a hanger-on. Maybe you can talk to him. |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
"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 m... 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. |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
On Aug 3, 1:19 pm, "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 m... 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.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - OK, so which one would you rather ride down a rough road? Which one would you rather resell? Which one would you drive to the ground? Which one would you drive your girl friend to the beach in? Real tool guys realize that everyone uses different tools for different activities, I have 11 hammers, and use them all. There is no excuse anymore for any engine or drivetrain to fail unless used beyond it's design. I know there are times, but basically, modern drive trains, taken care of, not abused, should outlast most bodies. If it comes to towing, and I had my druthers, I would take the old ladder frame Ford. Taking a couple of kakaks and my babe to the beach, maybe the Toyota, or of course my personal fav, not in the discussion, my old CJ. Just some ramblings from someone who has worked in the automotive industry , towing industry (wreckers were all Fords BTW, the hook was a 1976;). and done a good deal of off roading GMC and Jeep mostly... One last thought before I go use my BOAT!!! Remember boats anyone. Maybe you all love your trucks so much cause you are just really smart guys, bought the right tool in the first place, took care of it, and it served you well;) |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
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 |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
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 |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 17:01:26 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote: "John H." wrote in message .. . 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 |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
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 |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
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 ;) |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
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 |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
|
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
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? |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
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 |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
"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. |
An interesting video on pickup truck box bounce
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. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:29 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com