New truck #@$%@#&

[Fuddy1952]

I agree.

 

[Jstpssng]

^^^^^
You left out the small diesel 4 bangers, delivering 30 mpg. My V-6 Ranger gets 17, a little less than my full sized Sierra.
I keep hearing rumors that Chevy will soon be putting them in an S-10 (or whatever they are called now.)

 

[DIYjunkie]

That was 1980s with Mitaubishi, Perkins, and Isuzu diesel engines with next to no power, but they did deliver low to mid 30s mpg.

I do agree they need to bring back a true compact truck again about the size of the Ranger when it left in 2011, but more capable in towing, hauling and way better fuel economy as they were back when they were around. Even the Explorer sporttrac was a decent size truck.

 

[Fuddy1952]

My '83 VW Rabbit diesel would get 40 to 50 mpg. No hp...you had to build speed to make a hill, but great little truck for carrying up to a few hundred pounds.

 

[ultrarunner]

My '83 VW Rabbit diesel would get 40 to 50 mpg. No hp...you had to build speed to make a hill, but great little truck for carrying up to a few hundred pounds.

My boss had one new and set up to deliver engines and short blocks... worked real slick.

Acceleration was very slow but going over the mountains on the interstate at speed was no problem...

He bought it for the fuel mileage...

 

[MossRoad]

I used to drive a diesel Toyota mini pickup with a refer/heater box on the back. It was in the mid 80's, so I think the truck was a 70s model. 5 speed manual. I hauled flowers for a wholesaler to florists all over northern Indiana. The flowers had to be climate controlled. The box on the back was huge, so it was like driving a brick wall into the wind. That little diesel took a loooooooong time to get up to 55. It got in the high 20's for fuel mileage, which I thought was remarkable at the time, for pushing that sail through the wind.

 

[dfkrug]

I used to drive a diesel Toyota mini pickup with a refer/heater box on the back. It was in the
mid 80's, so I think the truck was a 70s model.

Toyota did offer a diesel engine in the US in the HiLux pickup, but not until the early 80s. It was rare and was only available for a few years.

As for the VW pickup, it not only had a weak engine, the front-wheel-drive also was extremely limiting if you wanted to carry any kind of load and go up a hill. That was also a problem for the nearly forgotten Dodge Omni-based PU sold for a couple of years in the early 80s: the Dodge Rampage. There was a Plymouth version, too.

 

[3930dave]

All the way back to the Chicken Tax, there's been a lot of interest (at the rainmaker level) in not having small trucks in the USA market. There were a few minor deviations in the Canuck market that were not south of the 49'th, but by and large our truck/car diesel choices are primarily tied to the USA market .

If you are towing an unlimited off-shore class power boat coast to coast, you'd want a big diesel pu with training wheels. (I'd probably use a medium-duty truck - cheaper to buy/maintain, and can be more capable.... but I'm drifting even further....).

VW's current Amorak diesel has an excellent 4x4 system, is rated for about 7k# towing, has a crew cab, and gets Jetta like mileage. There are always capable Toyoda (and other Asian) options in the small truck diesel market for us to drool over, but that's about as close as we get, w/o importing something 15+ years old. ROW has had the diesel Ranger for quite some time. For many of us, these small modern dzl trucks would cover 85%+ of our real needs. BUT, that could eat into Big Truck and Big Gasoline sales..... even pre-Trump, that wasn't going to be allowed.

Apologies for the rambling drift Fuddy.... does sort of tie-in though..... given the lack of alternatives here, I could readily see myself making the exact choice you did for a personal/working truck...... easy to work on, ready parts supply @ lowish cost, and a legendary engine that given the slightest bit of consistent maintenance may outlast some of us older timers :laughing:

Rgds, D.

 

[Ritothebull]

In other parts of the world the people decide what kind of vehicles they want, but here in the states it's the manufactures and the finance companies that decide what were going to get, along with help from the slick advertising industry.

 

[Gale Hawkins]

Too bad small trucks and manual transmissions are becoming more and more uncommon. The "small" trucks of the day are the same size as the old full size.

I know I'm not normal, but they need to at least offer pint size 4cyl pickups like the old Mitsubishi mighty max and S10 or Ranger. They'd get better gas mileage and would be much cheaper. Not all of us need to tow, but it's nice to have a bed for small farm/home loads.

The small truck is great. I owned my 4 banger 1986.5 for 30 years and enjoyed the old S-10. Recently I bought a 2010 Ford F150 4WD crew cab truck rated to tow up to 11.2K pounds. It had 205K miles on it and needed about a $1000 in body work to look sharp again at the price of $7400.

At age 67 and must up with arthritis I now understand while so many of these coming through McDonalds drive through as daily drivers. This high torque Ford still wants to get 18 MPG being just locally as a daily driver. My 2010 Subaru Forester will bet it MPG wise by a bit but comes up short in ride and general comfort.

The big pickup so far as won out in the USA market for real reasons I now realize.

Would I have paid the $45K sticker price in 2010? No but thankfully someone did and it became a wasting asset and still is.

 

[MossRoad]

Toyota did offer a diesel engine in the US in the HiLux pickup, but not until the early 80s. It was rare and was only available for a few years.

As for the VW pickup, it not only had a weak engine, the front-wheel-drive also was extremely limiting if you wanted to carry any kind of load and go up a hill. That was also a problem for the nearly forgotten Dodge Omni-based PU sold for a couple of years in the early 80s: the Dodge Rampage. There was a Plymouth version, too.

I found one reference to September of 1979 as the first diesel offering in a small pickup from Toyota. They dropped the HiLux name in 1976.

 

[bcp]

IH offered a diesel in the Scout in the 1970's.

Bruce

 

[dnw64]

Too bad small trucks and manual transmissions are becoming more and more uncommon. The "small" trucks of the day are the same size as the old full size.

I know I'm not normal, but they need to at least offer pint size 4cyl pickups like the old Mitsubishi mighty max and S10 or Ranger. They'd get better gas mileage and would be much cheaper. Not all of us need to tow, but it's nice to have a bed for small farm/home loads.

A few months ago one of the car mags did an op-ed article on "pickup trucks" and compared the F-100 to the trucks of today. They mentioned a price for the original, and the price today for a "typical" "pickup truck".

My thought was "the F-100 is the equivalent of a modern mini-truck; 2-door, 2WD, 6.5' or so bed". So I figured I would search for the current cost for such a beast. I did not find one single "mini" truck available in traditional 2-door only bcab configuration. And, as you mentioned, a row-your-own is scarcer than hen's teeth.

Regardless, by doing some projection, I concluded that IF such a configuration were available, it would be roughly the same price in today's dollars. Of course there would be some pluses and minuses; those might fall in different columns depending on personal preferences (thickness of body metal, "real" safety factors in today's world, simplicity, fuel mileage, maintenance, convenince, etc. etc).

 

[Jstpssng]

^^^^
You left out longetivity. Up here that F-100 would have rusted out in 5 years or less. 100K miles was a major milestone IF it lasted that long; by then you would have changed the points, plugs, condenser at least half a dozen times, probably more. Wheel bearings repacked multiple times, valve guides and seals would have been replaced at least once. Starter and alternator probably weren't original; the brakes would have been replaced at least twice. You would be on your third set of tires, assuming that you weren't buying recaps.

Now plugs are good for 100K miles, with average maintenance a vehicle can easily go 300K. For somebody who is diligent, you can expect much more than that.

My brother in Arizona had a running, rust free '66 Power Wagon with the original 318 big block that I could have had setting in my dooryard, after delivery fees for $2600. It would have been a fun toy but I started remembering how much work it was to keep my '68 pickup running 40 years ago, so I passed on it.

 

[dnw64]

^^^^
You left out longetivity. Up here that F-100 would have rusted out in 5 years or less. 100K miles was a major milestone IF it lasted that long; by then you would have changed the points, plugs, condenser at least half a dozen times, probably more. Wheel bearings repacked multiple times, valve guides and seals would have been replaced at least once. Starter and alternator probably weren't original; the brakes would have been replaced at least twice. You would be on your third set of tires, assuming that you weren't buying recaps.

Now plugs are good for 100K miles, with average maintenance a vehicle can easily go 300K. For somebody who is diligent, you can expect much more than that.

Of course there would be some pluses and minuses; those might fall in different columns depending on personal preferences... maintenance...etc. etc).

No, I think I covered it pretty well.

 

[tjkubota93]

That 6.7L is a blast (literally) to drive.

You turn your trucks over fast, so won't be an issue for you ID..... personally, I'd much sooner maintain Fuddy's I6 truck any day...... much goes wrong in the 6.7L engine bay, and you are pulling the cab off, and you have a fairly complex emission system to maintain as well on the 6.7L. I like a manual transmission for personal vehicles, but I will say I prefer the Super Duty automatics to the ones in modern F150s.

If you are not towing, well, then this 6.7L is a rocket truck - enjoy the ride !

Rgds, D.

6.7 was supposed to be able to be serviced cab still on I thought? One of the fixes from 6.0 and 6.4 turds.

 

[DIYjunkie]

6.7 was supposed to be able to be serviced cab still on I thought? One of the fixes from 6.0 and 6.4 turds.

Nope cab has to be pulled off, as is the procedure on Duramaxs as well. Too much garbage in the way.

 

[tjkubota93]

Nope cab has to be pulled off, as is the procedure on Duramaxs as well. Too much garbage in the way.

My buddy at work said he bought his 6.7 because he saw one at the dealer getting heads changed with cab on. I was impressed, maybe I should not be.....

 

[ID Corgi Ranch]

^^^^^
You left out the small diesel 4 bangers, delivering 30 mpg. My V-6 Ranger gets 17, a little less than my full sized Sierra.
I keep hearing rumors that Chevy will soon be putting them in an S-10 (or whatever they are called now.)

Chevy/GMC has offered the Colorado/Canyon with a 2.8L Duramax since 2016. Great little truck. Not the most power but it's adequate. I drove a Colorado for a year and the real world combined fuel mileage was 30 MPG. The Silverado/Sierra 1500 will be available with a 3.0L Duramax in the 2019 model year.

Ford F-150 can be had with a 3.0L Powerstroke starting late this year.

Both Ford and Chevy claim some pretty impressive numbers for the trucks including 30+ MPG.

 

[Jstpssng]

^^^^^
I guess that it's been longer than I realized since I checked out new truck prices. That F150 Powerstroke could be worth looking into when they get the bugs worked out of it.