1/2 ton pickup opinions???

Spiveyman · Aug 5, 2007

JoeinTX said:
"Are you Mennonite?..."

Well, duh, obviously he is. That's we he's driving a driving a modern vehicle and using a modern computer to post on the modern internet and using a modern camera to "capture spirits" for posting on this modern forum.

Yes, he's a Mennonite. Clear as a bell and why do you even have to ask that question it's so obvious. Right now, he's already blown out the candles and fired up the bed warmer and snoozing away in his feather bed until the rooster wakes him at 4am. Better ask around 5pm tomorrow afternoon before supper so that he can write back via his windmill powered computer and secret internet connection that he uses for speaking with the "English" when he's feeling particularly naughty....

HA! Now that was funny!

NO, it was a joke, you know, Henry Ford, you can have any color as long as it's black! Maybe I shouldn't be so subtle in my humor. I like your approach better.

cp1969 · Aug 5, 2007

RollingsFarms said:
please explain to me how 345 hp is greater then 425 hp? is that the new math or something? you are mistaken because if you followed NASCAR back in the 60's and 70's you would find that richard petty ran a 426 hemi and it made close to 800 hp with two carbs so nascar made the hemis run only one carb and that puched the hp numbers back significantly. the chevy motors that you insist on putting down make plenty of hp while maintaining a respectable gas milage average using their vortex design. i can look it up for you and give you the diagram if youd like.

Can you not read? The 5.7 truck Hemi of today displaces 347 cubic inches, makes 345 hp and 375 ft-lb of torque. The 354, the closest displacement Hemi previously available in trucks, made 218 hp and 318 ft-lb. Yeah, I can see where today's Hemi is a shadow of its former self. Mopar's Infamous Hemi - Hemi Engine Database

The 392 topped out at 390 hp, 435 ft-lb. Not available in a truck.
Mopar's Infamous Hemi - Hemi Engine Database

The 426 street Hemi (not available in a truck) was always rated at 425 hp, 490 ft-lb. It always had 2 four barrels. It never came close to 600 hp unless it was modified. What a NASCAR engine did back then is totally irrelevant.

If you want to compare today's Hemi to those two early Hemis, there are better comparisons that the truck engine, a 370 cubic inch version used in the Chrysler 300 that makes 425 hp and 420 ft-lb, SAE NET:
Mopar's Infamous Hemi - Hemi Engine Database

BTW, where did I 'put down' a Chevy engine, other than to ask how many valves it had? THAT'S a put down?????

FWIW, I do not own a Hemi.

Diamondpilot · Aug 5, 2007

I think the thing to be learned here is everyone has a favorite. The truth of the matter is what do you like. They all have the bad points. The Dodges are known for the tranny problems, the Gm's are known for the poor brakes and little items failing like switches, and the Fords are known for front end issues like ball joints. I am a Ford Guy. I will argue till I am blue in the face and walk away thinking I am right. I have owned a Gm and a Dodge and had very bad experiences. Yes, I have had a few problems with the 11 Fords I have had but nothing that was serious, a bad dash cluster, a truck that came from the factory out of alignment, and a power window go out (luckily it was up). None of my Fords ever stranded me or spent a night in the repair shop, much better than my Gm that I owned for 1 1/2 years 35,000 miles and spent more than 3 months total in the shop. My Dodge was not much better. I had it 2 years and about 70,000 miles and spent about 1 month of its life in the shop.

The end result is everyone thinks they are right and has a favorite. It all comes down to how the dealer treats you and what type of luck you have.

Chris

workinallthetime · Aug 5, 2007

the dealer i used to work would do fleet management for a large pipelines company here in oklahoma. since the dealer had all of the big 3 plus in their nationwide line up we would prep new fords, chevys, and dodges for them and we would also take in their used up units. we had around 20 dodges in a year that had broken frames under the drivers side floor board, numerous fords that had major transmission problems and the chevys seemed to be holding up under the same type of abuse. the fords and dodges were actually sold for scrap and the chevys were sold for about 2-5k. all of them were 3/4 ton gas burners. this is just what i saw in a few years, and this made me pround to be a gm man. we just bought a new deanli with the 6.2 gas burner and man does it haul.
good look in your quest

RollingsFarms · Aug 5, 2007

workinallthetime said:
the dealer i used to work would do fleet management for a large pipelines company here in oklahoma. since the dealer had all of the big 3 plus in their nationwide line up we would prep new fords, chevys, and dodges for them and we would also take in their used up units. we had around 20 dodges in a year that had broken frames under the drivers side floor board, numerous fords that had major transmission problems and the chevys seemed to be holding up under the same type of abuse. the fords and dodges were actually sold for scrap and the chevys were sold for about 2-5k. all of them were 3/4 ton gas burners. this is just what i saw in a few years, and this made me pround to be a gm man. we just bought a new deanli with the 6.2 gas burner and man does it haul.
good look in your quest

I can't tell you how many stories I've heard with similar results. It always makes me proud that I'm a GM guy also.

Z-Michigan · Aug 5, 2007

RayH said:
I was joking about his Black vehicles.
Anyways, while I doubt it, it's entirely possible he is Mennonite. Some Mennonite groups do use some modern conveniences (and they drive black vehicles). I think its the Amish you are thinking about that dont use automobiles and modern conveniences

Yes. A local auction house is run by Mennonites. While some show up in horse drawn wagons, they also have a skid loader to move round bales, and the company has a website. My understanding of Mennonites is that they limit their use of technology but don't completely avoid it like the Amish. Anyway, all the ones I've met have seemed like really good, nice people.

psj12 · Aug 6, 2007

Traded my half ton 03 Dodge HEMI Auto Trans. after pulling my 7,000 lb travel trailer from MD to OK. The milage while towing was 5.6 to 6.5 MPG.
The best milage ever attained was 16.9 on the highway. 11.5 around town. This truck had a 21 or 22 gal tank and went 120 miles between fillups.
The last trip I took on the highway (with 55,000 on odometer) measured 14.6. On the return trip with an empty 14' cargo trailer I got 7.7MPG. I just couldn't afford this lousy mileage.
Bought an 07 Dodge 5.9 Cummins. Get 18 around town and 22 on the highway out of a heavier more powerfull truck. I haven't towed with it yet but deffinently expext more than 6.5 MPG.

Erik_in_Hoyt · Aug 6, 2007

Ray,
<sigh> I had a beautiful and eloquent 2000 word document that would have had all of you in tears and offering to send me $$ for a new truck, and the forum logged me off while I was typing.

oh, well.

If the heaviest load you look to haul is under 3,000 pounds plus the weight of the trailer (didn't you say your tractor only weighs 2600 pounds?) you might be OK with something smaller than a 1/2 T truck.
I've had good luck in the past with 2 & 4 wheel drive Rangers, both manual and automatic, 2.3 l4 & 4.0 v6 motors. both did fine hauling trailers under 5k gross weight.
currently I drive an 04 quad cab Dakota and I wish it had a V-8, but when I got the truck I had neither a tractor or a tandem axle trailer. Now I do and the 3.7 v6 struggles when I put my 5,000 pound tractor setup on the trailer, but it will pull it in 4th without feeling unsteady. (4 wheel brakes, and stay off the 4 lane blacktop)
Even the local Ford dealer tells me I would be fine if I had the v-8.

on the other hand I have a friend with an 02 f150 and another with the 04 dodge 1500 -- neither of them has any complaints.

Pick what's comfortable and a good deal and I'm sure you'll be well ahead of the curve!

cp1969 · Aug 6, 2007

RollingsFarms said:
I can't tell you how many stories I've heard with similar results. It always makes me proud that I'm a GM guy also.

Me, either, except the brands change places from story to story.

JESSE1 · Aug 6, 2007

What it all adds up to is you can get a good or bad truck in any brand you buy. Buy the truck that appeals to you and you'll probably be happy with it. If you buy one on the advice of someone else you'll probably hate it. These arguments have been going on for hundreds of years-just substitute breeds of horses for brands of trucks.

dgl24087 · Aug 6, 2007

I've had Chevy trucks in the past, put 198500 miles on one, 98800 on the other. Had brake pad wear issues on the 2nd truck until I started putting premium pads on it. I traded the 2nd Chevy for a 2007 Ram 1500 4x4, 4.7L V8, AT, towed a 4600 lbs. (trailer and cargo) for a distance of 250 miles Sunday. No problems with power, got 12 mpg, I normally get 17-18 in 60% highway, 40% city driving.

RayH · Aug 6, 2007

Erik_in_Hoyt said:
If the heaviest load you look to haul is under 3,000 pounds plus the weight of the trailer (didn't you say your tractor only weighs 2600 pounds?) you might be OK with something smaller than a 1/2 T truck.

Actually Erik, Im tending to agree with you. Ive been doing a little shopping around and my favorite Ive seen so far is a 2005 Nissan Frontier. Im also talking to a guy about his 98 Mazda B4000. Years ago I had a Mazda and it was a good little truck.
Yes my tractor weighs around 2600 + a tandem trailer that will weigh around 1600 puts me around 4200lbs. I did mention that the max I would ever be towing with it would be 6000lbs but that was if I ever have an emergency occation to have to tow another vehicle. I dont plan on towing even 4000lbs on a regular basis.
So Ive opened my search up to smaller trucks. Im really liking the newer Nissans and of course, you cant go wrong with a Tacoma. I talked to a salesman about a Tacoma on his lot today. I'll talk further with him later. Its a 99 but only has 37000 miles and is in excellent condition. Its optioned almost exactly the way I want it. I like that it has low mileage but when mileage is that low ( less than 5000/yr) it always sends up a red flag for me. He says its never been wrecked and the mileage is correct. they want $14900 for it, which is way too much. Im thinking of offering around $12000.

workinallthetime · Aug 6, 2007

like a gm engineer said to me, just about any truck can pull way over its limit, the problem is it cant stop anything over its limit. your not limited my want you can tow your limited by what you can stop in a panic situation. I have been pushed through more than one intersection as im sure most of us have. This is the main reason i have such a problem with little trucks pulling big loads. brakes are far better than they used to be but when you have close to 11,000 pounds pushing a 5,000 pound truck how long is it going to take you to stop even with trailer brakes before you wipe out grandma doing 45 in a 60?
when i see a 1 ton or 3/4 ton pulling a cat backhoe i stay far away because i know he is over weight and is chancing everyone's life on the road including his.
shock loading breaks stuff and i dont want to be the one in the paper who killed the the family of 4 in the ford festiva.

RayH · Aug 7, 2007

workinallthetime said:
like a gm engineer said to me, just about any truck can pull way over its limit, the problem is it cant stop anything over its limit. your not limited my want you can tow your limited by what you can stop in a panic situation. I have been pushed through more than one intersection as im sure most of us have. This is the main reason i have such a problem with little trucks pulling big loads. brakes are far better than they used to be but when you have close to 11,000 pounds pushing a 5,000 pound truck how long is it going to take you to stop even with trailer brakes before you wipe out grandma doing 45 in a 60?
when i see a 1 ton or 3/4 ton pulling a cat backhoe i stay far away because i know he is over weight and is chancing everyone's life on the road including his.
shock loading breaks stuff and i dont want to be the one in the paper who killed the the family of 4 in the ford festiva.

heres the thing about manufaturers tow limits, they mean practically nothing as far as safety is concerned. Safety is not the determining factor when a vehicle manufacturer puts a tow limit on their vehicle. Do some research, you will find that two identical trucks, the only difference being one is a stick shift, the other is an automatic. will have very different tow capacities. The same goes for two identical trucks with different engines. As far as safety goes, they might as well say Red trucks can tow twice as much as white ones.
Nissan. I was doing some research of Nissan Frontiers. This year they bumped there tow rating up to 6500 from 6100 but changed nothing on the truck. Why did they do it, because Toyota bumped theirs up. So last year it was only safe to tow 6100 but this year, same truck different model year, its safe with 6500????.
Another example, I'll use GM because you mentioned it. GM 1500 short beds have the same tow capacity as the identically equiped long bed trucks. We all know its safer to tow with a long wheelbase vehicle verses a short wheelbase vehicle but GM rates them the same. Why??? because safety is not factored in.
I dont mean to sound like I dont put importance on safety, Im just saying I dont depend on the truck manufacturer to tell me whats safe and whats not based on some arbitrary number they place on a vehicle. Whats safe is something I will determine for myself and the drivers around me will have to live or die with my decisions.
Anyway, it doesnt matter, thanks for your opinion.

Erik_in_Hoyt · Aug 7, 2007

Ray,
I've not had much experience with Toyotas since the 80's when they seemed to rust out almost as fast as they ran out of fuel -- but that's been corrected.
The Nissan Frontier series are great trucks from all I've seen - they were just a bit cramped for me.
I love the Rangers and Mazda B-series trucks - and that 4.0 is a serious workhorse.
Chevy S-10 and Colorado trucks felt even smaller than the Nissans.
But then, I'm 6'1" and well over 200 pounds, so shoulder and head room are important to me.

And of course, as I said before - if my Dakota had a bit more oomph, I wouldn't be shopping myself. (again, my fault - I coulda had a V8!)

I agree with you that $14k is too much for a 98, (Blue book on my 04 quad cab 4x4 is in <that> ball park!) keep looking and I'm sure you'll find the right tool for the job!

2520tlh · Aug 7, 2007

My experience:
2003 F-150, 4.2 V-6, 5 spd man tranny, longbed reg cab, 4x4. Truck has 110K miles on it. Probably 10% mileage with 1000 lbs in bed and 20% mileage pulling 6000 lbs. Had anti theft device crap out ($200), coil went bad ($500), and broke the steering wheel lock ($300, my fault). Gets 18 mixed city/hiway, 12-14 pulling trailer
2002 F-150, 5.4 V-8, auto tranny, ext cab short bed, 4x4. Has 80K miles. 10% with 1000 lbs in bed, 5% towing 6000 lbs. This truck struggles to pulls the 6000lb trailer worse than the 2003 v-6 truck(15 mpg empty, 10 pulling trailer). No problems with this truck so far.
1997 F-150, 4.2 V-6, 5 spd man, ext cab shortbed. Truck had 130K when traded in with no probs. Never hauled much of anything (15-20 mpg).
1989 F-250, 5.0 V-8, 5spd man, longbed reg cab. Had 150K when traded in. Had 30% with 1000 lbs in the bed. Ate 1-1.5 quarts per oil change. Was pig slow and warped rotors but I think the 5.0 would have lasted another 150K.
1974 Chevy 3/4 ton, 292 cubic inch I-6, three on the tree, reg cab long bed. Went 200+K before the odometer stopped working. No probs other than the entire truck rusted out. I mean everything rusted out. Rode like a log truck and gas milage sucked bad. But it would pull and lasted forever. Pulled camper and boat for most of its life. Dont know the weights.

I really dont know much about the new chevy and ford. Only driven a dodge once(mabe 2004). It seemed huge!

workinallthetime · Aug 7, 2007

RayH said:
heres the thing about manufaturers tow limits, they mean practically nothing as far as safety is concerned. Safety is not the determining factor when a vehicle manufacturer puts a tow limit on their vehicle. Do some research, you will find that two identical trucks, the only difference being one is a stick shift, the other is an automatic. will have very different tow capacities. The same goes for two identical trucks with different engines. As far as safety goes, they might as well say Red trucks can tow twice as much as white ones.
Nissan. I was doing some research of Nissan Frontiers. This year they bumped there tow rating up to 6500 from 6100 but changed nothing on the truck. Why did they do it, because Toyota bumped theirs up. So last year it was only safe to tow 6100 but this year, same truck different model year, its safe with 6500????.
Another example, I'll use GM because you mentioned it. GM 1500 short beds have the same tow capacity as the identically equiped long bed trucks. We all know its safer to tow with a long wheelbase vehicle verses a short wheelbase vehicle but GM rates them the same. Why??? because safety is not factored in.
I dont mean to sound like I dont put importance on safety, Im just saying I dont depend on the truck manufacturer to tell me whats safe and whats not based on some arbitrary number they place on a vehicle. Whats safe is something I will determine for myself and the drivers around me will have to live or die with my decisions.
Anyway, it doesnt matter, thanks for your opinion.

the thing i see most often that changes the amout a unit can tow is the weight of the unit. for instance the tow rating on a 3/4 ton is actually higher than that of a 1 ton in 99-2004, due to the added weight of duel rear wheels. gm has determined that a truck that weighs x amount can stop a load that ways y amount safely. long wheel base and duel rear wheels add stability buit not necessary better stopping distance.
the siminar i went to in 99 went into great detail about this and its been way to long since i was there, but the one thing they beat into our heads was that the ratings were based on what the truck could stop safely not pull.
my gm 2 cents

RollingsFarms · Aug 7, 2007

workinallthetime said:
the thing i see most often that changes the amout a unit can tow is the weight of the unit. for instance the tow rating on a 3/4 ton is actually higher than that of a 1 ton in 99-2004, due to the added weight of duel rear wheels. gm has determined that a truck that weighs x amount can stop a load that ways y amount safely. long wheel base and duel rear wheels add stability buit not necessary better stopping distance.
the siminar i went to in 99 went into great detail about this and its been way to long since i was there, but the one thing they beat into our heads was that the ratings were based on what the truck could stop safely not pull.
my gm 2 cents

this reason alone would make me choose the F-150 over the new Tundra simply because of the standard trailer brake integration Ford offers.

workinallthetime · Aug 7, 2007

RollingsFarms said:
this reason alone would make me choose the F-150 over the new Tundra simply because of the standard trailer brake integration Ford offers.

you can have the same thing with the new gm 3/4 and 1 ton versions, im sure in 08 you can get it in 1/2 tons also

RollingsFarms · Aug 7, 2007

workinallthetime said:
you can have the same thing with the new gm 3/4 and 1 ton versions, im sure in 08 you can get it in 1/2 tons also

oh i was giving praise to Ford. i'm a Chevy guy....it would take one helluva truck to make me switch. and even then, i would be cautious. i'm still loving my '04 Z71, don't see myself getting rid of it anytime soon, although i would love to have a new 1/2 ton (only if it had a 3.73 rear end), or if i could afford it a 3/4 but only if it had the duramax. thats cool GM decided to add this feature though. i also wish they would mimick the keyless entry that Ford has(where you type in the 4 digit code on the door).