Which truck would you get?

[RobertN]

What is wrong with the brakes?

How often do you service the trailer brakes/axles? I know my '98 5th wheel says every 3000 mile or 3 months for brakes, 12,000 miles yearly to inspect/repack the bearings. Even behind my diesel 3/4 ton, it brakes nicer when the brakes are adjusted.

What about your controller? I went from and earlier Tekonsha controller to their Prodigy; that works much nicer.

Overall I am pleased with the setup, but the truck has some limitations. The brakes could be better, and aftermarket products are either sky high prices or non existant.

 

[fordmantpw]

In terms of useable pulling power in an everyday situation, the diesel obviously wins. You would not want to drive a gasser with the throttle on the firewall for hours on end like you can with a diesel.

Yep, that's why I tow with a diesel. It is a much more relaxed tow.

 

[Turbys_1700]

For your budget you are looking at an older diesel or newer gasser...
I have an 03 F350 with the 7.3 and it will never leave this farm...
I would look at the 00-03 7.3's in a Ford if you are going diesel...
I would stay away from the first generation 6.0's...
I've got a friend that runs a 450 wrecker and they just put a new engine in a 6.4 with 305K miles on it but the darn thing had 5 radiators replaced under warranty...
The most truck for your money IMHO will be a F250 / F350 gasser 5 to 7 years old...
This should put you in your budget range...

 

[handirifle]

What is wrong with the brakes?

How often do you service the trailer brakes/axles? I know my '98 5th wheel says every 3000 mile or 3 months for brakes, 12,000 miles yearly to inspect/repack the bearings. Even behind my diesel 3/4 ton, it brakes nicer when the brakes are adjusted.

What about your controller? I went from and earlier Tekonsha controller to their Prodigy; that works much nicer.

Trailer brakes and controller are not an issue. Not saying they can't be, but in this case no. They are like new pads, brakes on both axles, and controller properly adjusted. Actually set a little on the heavy side, to compensate for the spongy pedal of the Tundra. I have to keep the rears of the Tunda manually adjusted, just to keep solid pedal when driving empty, much less when towing.

A 1 ton gasser will not be in my future, as even some semblance of mileage is needed. No desire to go to 10-11mpg empty. I have been in too many of those to even desire one. Besides a 1 ton is really overkill for my needs (unless I got a steal of a deal on one). I might concentrate on the 00-03 Ford 7.3's or the same year Dodge. Did those year Dodges still have the tranny issues?

Any input on those years of the Duramaxes, specificlally any big issues with the whole trucks? Talking brakes, tranny major engine issues, etc. I have read that about 100K seems to be a turning point for many 7.3's factory injectors, according to Diesel Power magazine anyway.

 

[handirifle]

He is pulling your leg, plain and simple. The 6.2L is a great towing engine (I've heard better than the V10), and certainly better on fuel than the V10, but there's no way he's getting the fuel economy numbers he told you. It just ain't happening!



The EcoBoost has been a great engine for Ford. Check out some of the videos of the torture they put that engine through. It runs just fine on regular gas, but Ford recommends premium if towing heavy or towing at high altitudes. It also makes a bit more power on premium too.

I did see that test on the TV which is the ONLY reason I give it any creedance at all. Still, similar mileage numbers are possible with a number of other setups, with far lees things to go wrong. To me, the auto companies still have a pretty dismal track record with turbo'd gas engines, and longetivety.

 

[aczlan]

I did see that test on the TV which is the ONLY reason I give it any creedance at all. Still, similar mileage numbers are possible with a number of other setups, with far lees things to go wrong. To me, the auto companies still have a pretty dismal track record with turbo'd gas engines, and longetivety.

Which ones? There are many, many Volvos out there with 4 and 5 cylinder turbo engines that have hundreds of thousands of miles on them (Dads '98 S70 had 210k on it when it found a power pole and the turbo was just starting to leak from the oil seals).

Aaron Z

 

[Turbys_1700]

Trailer brakes and controller are not an issue. Not saying they can't be, but in this case no. They are like new pads, brakes on both axles, and controller properly adjusted. Actually set a little on the heavy side, to compensate for the spongy pedal of the Tundra. I have to keep the rears of the Tunda manually adjusted, just to keep solid pedal when driving empty, much less when towing.

A 1 ton gasser will not be in my future, as even some semblance of mileage is needed. No desire to go to 10-11mpg empty. I have been in too many of those to even desire one. Besides a 1 ton is really overkill for my needs (unless I got a steal of a deal on one). I might concentrate on the 00-03 Ford 7.3's or the same year Dodge. Did those year Dodges still have the tranny issues?

Any input on those years of the Duramaxes, specificlally any big issues with the whole trucks? Talking brakes, tranny major engine issues, etc. I have read that about 100K seems to be a turning point for many 7.3's factory injectors, according to Diesel Power magazine anyway.

I have 105K miles on my 7.3 and the injectors have been trouble free...
Last year our church purchased an F450 turtle top van that has a 7.3 with over 175K miles and the injectors have not been touched...
At least according to the service records...
These two instances my be aberrations to the norm...
I don't know...
I have performed routine maintenance on my 7.3 with no major expense since purchased with 38K miles on it...
It is a good truck...

 

[94BULLITT]

The 6.2 will eat ANY of the previous diesels??
so if you compare the highest 6.2s hp 385 tq =434 @4179 RPM or the over 10k gvwr 316 hp tq 397@4179 RPM to even the say 04.5 cummins @ 325hp tq 600@1600RPM Hmmm towing anything , low end torque is of importance the Cummins will be making 600 ft lbs. at 1600 RPMs the 6.2 ford will be Lucky to make maybe 275 ft lbs. at 1600 rpm??? (no turbo- right? ) I don't see it, or are Cummins not being compared?? the 6.2s torque #s are at rpms not normally seen ?? What gives?? got the 6.2 specs off of Meadowland Fords site.. anyone seen a graph with the torque displayed- from say 1400 rpm and up ??

I meant to say any of the previous Ford diesels. Check out the Link to pickuptruck.com that fordmantpw posted. The 6.2 is right there with the Cummins.

Here is a good thread on gas vs diesel.

Ohio truck meet results and videos - Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums

 

[94BULLITT]

Trailer brakes and controller are not an issue. Not saying they can't be, but in this case no. They are like new pads, brakes on both axles, and controller properly adjusted. Actually set a little on the heavy side, to compensate for the spongy pedal of the Tundra. I have to keep the rears of the Tunda manually adjusted, just to keep solid pedal when driving empty, much less when towing.

A 1 ton gasser will not be in my future, as even some semblance of mileage is needed. No desire to go to 10-11mpg empty. I have been in too many of those to even desire one. Besides a 1 ton is really overkill for my needs (unless I got a steal of a deal on one). I might concentrate on the 00-03 Ford 7.3's or the same year Dodge. Did those year Dodges still have the tranny issues?

Any input on those years of the Duramaxes, specificlally any big issues with the whole trucks? Talking brakes, tranny major engine issues, etc. I have read that about 100K seems to be a turning point for many 7.3's factory injectors, according to Diesel Power magazine anyway.

Do some calculating to see if a gas getting 10-12 empty would be more expensive to own than a diesel getting 17-18. A diesel cost more to buy initially and more to maintain. Every persons needs are different though.

Yes those year dodges had junks transmissions unless you get a manual.

 

[Bigfoot62]

I am considering, no major decisions or commitments made as yet, buying a diesel 3/4T to pull my 5th wheel trailer with. It's a light weight model (5200lb dry) meant for 1/2T trucks and that is what I currently tow it with. I use my 2006 Tundra, w 4.7L, rated to tow 7,000. The truck is my regular driver. I didn't say daily, on purpose cause sometime I don't start it for 3-4 days in a row. We are retired and if the wife goes along, we take her car, unless we need to haul something big. While towing this trailer I get an avg of 9 mpg on reg gas. About 17-18 freeway.

In the Ford line it would have to at least have the 7.3 Powerstroke, and not the older 7.3. I have read too much negative about the older engine. . .

My needs are not huge, and I am considering the upgrade in power cause a lot of rental companies are requiring 3/4T min. That's not a big reason, but it is one. I would like to have considerably more grunt for pulling long grade with the 5th wheel, and better brakes.

I do not see us ever getting a bigger trailer, smaller if anything . . .

I'm going to speak to the Fords, because that's what I know.
By the "older 7.3," I assume you're talking about the IDI engines. (non-turbo) That was '88-'93. They were actually great engines. Didn't have the power of the 'Strokes, but would run forever.
Generation I 7.3 PowerStrokes are '94-'97. This is basically a 7.3 IDI with a turbocharger and different heads. (and more horsepower)
Generation II 7.3 PowerStrokes are '99-early 2003. This is basically the same as the Gen I, but with a bigger blower and an intercooler (aka: charge air cooler or air-to-air cooler). (and again, more horsepower)
BTW, There is no '98 Super Duty, and mid-year '03 they started installing the 6.0. (FWIW, most of the 6.0 engines were very, very good or very, very not. You typically had lots of trouble or none at all)
I've had several of these trucks and currently have a '97 F-250 and a '03 F-350. Both are great trucks, and no, they're not for sale.

Things to be aware of:
All of the 7.3 Navistar engines were subject to cavitation (electrolysis) in the cooling system. This is easily prevented by adding a SCA (supplemental coolant additive) or a "pre-charged" coolant with bitterment in it.
The original clutch and "dual-mass" flywheel was a weak point on the standard shift transmissions. That is fixed by replacing with a LuK clutch/flywheel.


I agree with your logic. I have a F-350, F-250, F-150, and a Toyota Tacoma. So, I have a choice every time I want to pull a trailer, and I don't tow with the 1/2 tons. The bigger brakes and heavier suspension, along with the torque of the diesel, just make the Super Duty a superior tow vehicle when compared to a 1/2 ton. There is nothing like having the right tool for the job.
And, I have big, heavy trailers. 24' enclosed stock trailer, 24' utility trailer (both gooseneck), and a 30' fifth wheel.

 

[Bigfoot62]

. . . Now, on the gasser idea, when I was camping in Columbia, CA last summer, one of the guys in the group had bought a new Ford 3/4T but ordered the 6.2L gas engine and 6spd auto, instead of diesel. Not sure the axle ration, but most likely 3.73. Anyway he was towing about an 8-9K 5th wheel and said the truck would pull it on grades faster than he wanted to drive. He averaged about 12-13 towing, he said, and usually 18-19 when empty. He claimed he had gotten 21 before cause the engine is loafing along at 65. . .

Three things that a man will lie about:
1. His *** life.
2. His dog.
3. His gas mileage.

 

[crazyal]

Trailer brakes and controller are not an issue. Not saying they can't be, but in this case no. They are like new pads, brakes on both axles, and controller properly adjusted. Actually set a little on the heavy side, to compensate for the spongy pedal of the Tundra. I have to keep the rears of the Tunda manually adjusted, just to keep solid pedal when driving empty, much less when towing.

A 1 ton gasser will not be in my future, as even some semblance of mileage is needed. No desire to go to 10-11mpg empty. I have been in too many of those to even desire one. Besides a 1 ton is really overkill for my needs (unless I got a steal of a deal on one). I might concentrate on the 00-03 Ford 7.3's or the same year Dodge. Did those year Dodges still have the tranny issues?

Any input on those years of the Duramaxes, specificlally any big issues with the whole trucks? Talking brakes, tranny major engine issues, etc. I have read that about 100K seems to be a turning point for many 7.3's factory injectors, according to Diesel Power magazine anyway.

Do you use your parking brake? I never did until I found out that the parking brake is what adjusts the brakes. Since it's an automatic I would just shift into park and not think twice. I actually found a pretty good procedure that has worked well for me.

Drive slowly in reverse and apply the parking brake MILDLY (about halfway or 3-5 clicks) to get the front shoe snug against the drum. Apply the brake PEDAL in pumping fashion to get the rear shoe to periodically grab against the drum resulting in a rocking action between the front and rear shoe. When you are satisfied, release the parking brake and test the brakes by driving forward normally. Alternatively and a little more tricky to pull off, one can alternatingly apply the parking brake and the regular foot brake in alternating fashion to achieve the type of brake shoe rocking action necessary to tighten the rear. This is tricky with the way the parking brake works, but with a little practice, can be done and works very well. You should immediately notice firmer pedal if your rear brakes were too loose and your adjustment method was successful.

 

[handirifle]

Which ones? There are many, many Volvos out there with 4 and 5 cylinder turbo engines that have hundreds of thousands of miles on them (Dads '98 S70 had 210k on it when it found a power pole and the turbo was just starting to leak from the oil seals).

Aaron Z

I hear that, but unless Volvo is making USA trucks, I am still leary.

 

[aczlan]

I hear that, but unless Volvo is making USA trucks, I am still leary.

Volvo used standard Garrett (T3 series) and Mitsubishi (TD04 series) turbos in the B230FT (2.3L Turbo I4) that went into the 200, 700 or 900 series cars and Mitsubishi (mostly the TD04 series) in the newer B525x (2.3-2.5L Turbo I5) that went into the 850, S70, V70, etc.
The Ecoboost F150 has 2 Garrett GT15 turbos in it, Garrett has been making turbos since at least the 1950s, so they should know what they are doing.

Aaron Z

 

[fordmantpw]

Volvo used standard Garrett (T3 series) and Mitsubishi (TD04 series) turbos in the B230FT (2.3L Turbo I4) that went into the 200, 700 or 900 series cars and Mitsubishi (mostly the TD04 series) in the newer B525x (2.3-2.5L Turbo I5) that went into the 850, S70, V70, etc.
The Ecoboost F150 has 2 Garrett GT15 turbos in it, Garrett has been making turbos since at least the 1950s, so they should know what they are doing.

Aaron Z

Don't waste your breath. It doesn't matter what you say, some folks are just too hard-headed to understand that change can be a good thing. You know, turbos in diesels are SUPER, but slap a turbo on a gasser, and suddenly turbos are junk!

 

[fordmantpw]

Do you use your parking brake? I never did until I found out that the parking brake is what adjusts the brakes. Since it's an automatic I would just shift into park and not think twice. I actually found a pretty good procedure that has worked well for me.

Drive slowly in reverse and apply the parking brake MILDLY (about halfway or 3-5 clicks) to get the front shoe snug against the drum. Apply the brake PEDAL in pumping fashion to get the rear shoe to periodically grab against the drum resulting in a rocking action between the front and rear shoe. When you are satisfied, release the parking brake and test the brakes by driving forward normally. Alternatively and a little more tricky to pull off, one can alternatingly apply the parking brake and the regular foot brake in alternating fashion to achieve the type of brake shoe rocking action necessary to tighten the rear. This is tricky with the way the parking brake works, but with a little practice, can be done and works very well. You should immediately notice firmer pedal if your rear brakes were too loose and your adjustment method was successful.

Hmmm, is that still the case with rear disc brakes that most vehicles have today?

 

[TSO]

I currently own a 2004 Toyota with the 4.7L V8. Before this, I owned a 2007 Tundra with the 4.7L, and then a 2010 Tundra with the 5.7L V8. That 5.7 was a great engine. 381hp/401tq, with a solid 6-spd trans. For a "1/2" ton gasser, you can't beat it. It's rated to tow around 10,500lbs (depends on configuration). The big problem with the Tundra, and any other 1/2 ton, is Payload. Some people have claimed that since Toyota only builds one full-sized truck, they built the Tundra with some parts in line with a 3/4 ton. The axles, brakes, rear-end (10.5"), etc... However, when it comes to payload, you're still limited to around 1500-1600lbs (again depending on config). Where as the 3/4+ ton trucks have 2500lbs+ of payload capacity.

I'm in the same boat as you. I sold my '10 Tundra so I could afford my 1st tractor (on my 2nd now) and bought the Sequoia used. It's been a great truck, but it's limited to 6500lbs towing cap. Now that I have my new tractor, this truck is over-worked... tractor weights 5500 all said, trailer is 1500+.

I've been looking around at 3/4-1ton Diesels too. The best deals right now are on the 03-07 F250's with the 6.0L diesel. I spend some time on the Ford forums regarding that engine. As long as you spend a little bit of money, it's a great engine on a good truck. But, it can be problematic and costly if you blow the head gaskets. I looked at the GM's, but it appears that if you get the 04 & older Duramax, you have to worry about the injectors which are even more costly. But the 05 & newer are more expensive to purchase. I've never been a fan of Dodge products personally, but I hear the 5.9L cummins was a fantastic engine.

The problem for me, and probably you, is... Diesels don't like to sit. They like to be used. Especially turbo diesels. This truck (for me anyhow) will be used only when needed, as we have 2 other "commuter" cars to use. That started pushing me to an F250 with the 6.8L v10, because it has good power and is pretty reliable (spark plug & exhaust manifold bolts notwithstanding). The trade off is crappy gas mileage. I personally owned an 04 F150 with the 5.4L v8 and it was a dog. I have read that the 5.4L in a SuperDuty is every worse (because of the extra weight) and I can believe it. That's too bad, because the absolutely BEST deals right now on used, are F250's with the 5.4L. Even if you swap the stock 3.73 gears up to 4.10 or 4.30, it's still a dog.

So I started looking at a Tundra again, and for around $18k you can get an 07-08 with less than 100k miles. Personally, I'm not worried about miles on a Tundra, my current rig has 135k and all our Toyota's have been fantastic. But just be advised, the 5.7L has an issue with the Water Pump, so if you do shop for one, check for leaks or seepage. It's only a $90 part, and if you can do the work youself, you'll save $400 in labor cost. The 07+ Tundra's also have a problem with the AIP system (Air Induction Pump) which is a startup emissions control device they had to add. Basically it injects extra air during startup to burn off harmful emissions. However, some have been prone to collecting water and throwing a code, which causes the ECU to put the truck into "limp mode" and you have to get them replaced. There is a work-around and you can bypass the AIP's completely for just a few bucks. But, with all this said...you still have that payload issue. The only way around it (not legally tho) is to beef up the rear suspension with Air-Bags or springs, and put some better (E-Rated 10ply) tires. All said, you're gonna spend at least $1k to do this. The engine and trans can handle the loads. The payload issue may never be a problem for you though, as you might never exceed it. I've been a member on one of the Tundra forums for several years, and there are lots of stories of Ford/GM/Dodge converts who claim their Tundra is a better puller than whatever 3/4 ton they were leaving behind, with much better reliability. Could be a bunch of BS, but who knows anymore with the internet.

So, I'm still up in the air myself too. Rumor has it that the 2014 Tundra might come with an "HD" package that will address the Payload concerns, but that might just be a rumor. I think that all the new trucks on the market are a quality and capable product right now tho, so if you are buying new, it's a tough choice. I might just wait a year and see what all happens in the truck market

 

[TomSeller]

3 choices
1. Ford
2. Ford
3. Ford

Any questions? Sorry, I am a Ford guy through and through.

 

[bspeedy]

No one has mentioned this, yet, so I'll offer it:

You mentioned that you would not up-size your camper, but smaller might be an option. How about selling trailer and tow vehicle and downsizing the trailer while up-sizing the pickup. That may get you a newer truck and a more easily towed camper. Not sure about you, but most of my family's camping time is spent outside the camper rather than inside.

In my opinion, diesel trucks are for long-haul heavy loads only. Or for looking cool. Get a 1/2 ton gasser and a bumper pull 20-footer for you and the missus.

 

[handirifle]

No one has mentioned this, yet, so I'll offer it:

You mentioned that you would not up-size your camper, but smaller might be an option. How about selling trailer and tow vehicle and downsizing the trailer while up-sizing the pickup. That may get you a newer truck and a more easily towed camper. Not sure about you, but most of my family's camping time is spent outside the camper rather than inside.

In my opinion, diesel trucks are for long-haul heavy loads only. Or for looking cool. Get a 1/2 ton gasser and a bumper pull 20-footer for you and the missus.

Speedy
I have not totally ruled that one out either in part or whole, as in selling and downsizing the trailer, keeping the truck, or getting rid of truck, as discussed, and keeping trailer. We are still in the figuring out phase.

Fordman
No need to get nasty, I have not and will not be rude to anyone. All are offering their opinions, and my opionions are just that, mine! And for the record, it's not the turbos I question, it's the internals. They (American car makers) have to prove themselves to me. Remember the GM 3.8 Turbo??? Remember the Corvair Turbo??

Yea those date back a ways but their track records are not sweet. Also kinda like the GM gasser/diesel conversions. When I see the Ford Ecoboost folks still very happy after 200K with a lot of towing miles in there I will sing a different tune.

Hey, I bought one of the first GM Front wheel drive (not counting the old Olds Toranado's) v6, fuel injected cars they put out, it was a Pontiac 2000. That thing was frought with problems. Ever have a rack and pinion system break from normal street driving? That one did along with a host of other problems. I am not new to driving, nor have I only owned one type or brand of car. Been driving legally since I was 15. That's 45 years on the road, and with a father that was a carreer mechanic, and myself a trained mechanic, I can honestly say I think I have a clue about the technology, and about companies putting crap on the market, to let US test it.

I am HIGHLY impressed with what Ford did with the Ecoboost truck engine, but just like folks say about drivers upping their mileage numbers, Ford (or any other car maker) is not in the market for ANY other reason, than to sell.