Lighter pickups coming soon- but geez have they gotten fat!

[tim3058]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

^This is what the "truck guys" on the message boards fear the next full-sized trucks will be if ANY fe-increasing regulation is foisted upon them. ...

Exactly

Sorry Frank, on the opposite end of that one. If people are buying 14mpg rigs may the force be with them... more assembly line jobs, and automakers recover that much faster... If there was a market for 30mpg trucks, then automakers would be selling em already without a bureaucrat telling em to. Guys wanting 30mpg and driving long distances may wish to consider something smaller than an F150 in the first place.

[Ryland]

What can a 5,000 pound pickup truck do that a 3,000 pound pickup truck not do?
The other day while at work we were talking about how the car we use to go bid jobs has a more powerful engine in it then the half ton dodge truck we use to go to job sites, trucks would do well with small turbo charged engines and and over all design down size of the vehicle, pickup trucks are so tall they are almost useless! and if you look under them it's not because they need the space, alot of it is just empty space so that they look jacked up and bigger.
I'm not sure what the towing capacity is, but if they can tow 6,000 pounds, I'd be temped to get a Ford Transit Connect as the next work vehicle.

[tim3058]

Originally Posted by Ryland

What can a 5,000 pound pickup truck do that a 3,000 pound pickup truck not do?

Good point, unless you are towing a fully-loaded cargo trailer or car hauler, probably not much.
My Silverado 1500 regularly hauls my quad but rarely tows anything. An S10 or Colorado could have done the same thing - why not get the 3,000 lb mini-truck? Couple issues:
1) A new Colorado 4x4 (w/ext cab cause the reg cab is pretty small) was only a few thousand dollars less, for what seemed to be a lower quality vehicle, with notably less power, less cab room, and smaller box.
2) The Colorados only got about 2mpg better than the Silverados.
3) Resale on the small trucks is much less than the full-size versions.

For me buying brand new, the compacts just didn't compare. When considering total life-cycle cost though (purchase price, loan interest, fuel costs) - for 95% of the truck owners out there, a used S10 would suffice. Now if only we could convince people of that...

[Frank Lee]

My Tempo could haul your quad

http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...uck-12610.html

Ryland: exactly. It's like there's some sort of pickup-truck arms race going on, and the result is LESS utility! OK, I'm 6'4" with big long monkey arms, and I can't even reach into the boxes of these newer trucks anymore. How is that "better"? The older ones- say, almost all of them up to about '95 or so- I can get stuff outta the box without crawling up in there. And the tailgates weren't 5' up in the air when down either. I've driven some of the newer ones and I wouldn't trade my old one for a new one if it was given to me. Well... unless I could sell the new one and buy my old one back and keep the difference! A friend of mine has one of these new monster trucks and it takes him about 10 minutes to get the leviathan into and out of a parking space.

[Clev]

Originally Posted by tim3058

Good point, unless you are towing a fully-loaded cargo trailer or car hauler, probably not much.
My Silverado 1500 regularly hauls my quad but rarely tows anything. An S10 or Colorado could have done the same thing - why not get the 3,000 lb mini-truck? Couple issues:
1) A new Colorado 4x4 (w/ext cab cause the reg cab is pretty small) was only a few thousand dollars less, for what seemed to be a lower quality vehicle, with notably less power, less cab room, and smaller box.
2) The Colorados only got about 2mpg better than the Silverados.
3) Resale on the small trucks is much less than the full-size versions.

For me buying brand new, the compacts just didn't compare. When considering total life-cycle cost though (purchase price, loan interest, fuel costs) - for 95% of the truck owners out there, a used S10 would suffice. Now if only we could convince people of that...

And that's the problem: Americans think that there are only two choices: a big guzzling truck, or a giant guzzling truck. A Foreman 4x4 quad on a Harbor Freight folding flatbed trailer is 850 pounds, and can easily be towed by anything larger than a Smart FourTwo. For 95% of the truck owners out there, a car would suffice.

And it's absolutely unacceptable that compact trucks get such poor mileage. There's no reason why they shouldn't get 30 mpg, or even more with a diesel.

[Clev]

Originally Posted by tim3058

Exactly

Sorry Frank, on the opposite end of that one. If people are buying 14mpg rigs may the force be with them... more assembly line jobs, and automakers recover that much faster... If there was a market for 30mpg trucks, then automakers would be selling em already without a bureaucrat telling em to. Guys wanting 30mpg and driving long distances may wish to consider something smaller than an F150 in the first place.

If gasoline actually reflected its true cost, there would be a market for 30 mpg trucks. Bureaucrats have already distorted the market by heavily subsidizing fossil fuels (and gas guzzlers, for that matter), so a little bureaucracy is needed to shift the outcome back to where it would otherwise be.

[cfg83]

Frank -

I miss the 1980's stripped down compact pickups. You could get one for $6K and be good to go with bare-bones simplicity.

CarloSW2

[Clev]

Originally Posted by cfg83

Frank -

I miss the 1980's stripped down compact pickups. You could get one for $6K and be good to go with bare-bones simplicity.

I often look through the LMC catalog and dream about what I could've done with my old '86 Ranger, which got 24+ mpg with leadfoot driving and short extra-wide tires.

[Jim-Bob]

The lack of a competent, cheap compact truck on the market is why I still drive my 362,000 mile 1998 Frontier. It does everything I need it to without costing a fortune ( It was $11,500 when I bought it new-and it's a king cab with A/C!). I have towed cars with it, hauled building supplies, and put all manner of automotive detritus in it's bed. All that and it's just a cheap, 4 cylinder/5 speed 2wd truck. Sorry, but I don't think that you need to have an F-250 to do 99% of the things most people want a truck for. It's one thing if you have a 10,000 lb trailer to haul, but most people don't haul much more than some Jet Skis.

[JasonG]

Originally Posted by Jim-Bob

The lack of a competent, cheap compact truck on the market is why I still drive my 362,000 mile 1998 Frontier. It does everything I need it to without costing a fortune ( It was $11,500 when I bought it new-and it's a king cab with A/C!). I have towed cars with it, hauled building supplies, and put all manner of automotive detritus in it's bed. All that and it's just a cheap, 4 cylinder/5 speed 2wd truck. Sorry, but I don't think that you need to have an F-250 to do 99% of the things most people want a truck for. It's one thing if you have a 10,000 lb trailer to haul, but most people don't haul much more than some Jet Skis.

Exactly.
I know a guy in Florida that runs a metal supply business. You should see how much plate, angle, pipe, I beams, etc he loads in 90's Nissan and Toyota pickups. I think they have 2.0 or 2.2L engines.
We had an old Chevy S10 (really an Isuzu) we would load to the bed rails with firewood. Never squeaked.
It kills me to see 1 tons as grocery getters. On top of that the cost is insane.
My truck below is a 94. No leather, vinyl floor, no cassette, fleet white, I bought it in 96 for 12K.
A current Duramax would set me back ~30K because of all the luxury features I dont want.
To hook a Ford 4wd regular bed to a fifth wheel means modifing the trailer suspension because the bed is so deep and high.

Laugh all you want, but I worked out of a motorcycle for a time. Tools in left saddle bag, cordless drill in right, lunchbox and parts bungied to the sissy bar. I even did a panel change off of it.