OT: trucks

"Ba r r y" wrote in message

> I always thought "Rust Belt" referred to the areas that held America's
> lost steel industry, not that things actually rusted more in a certain
> area. <G>
>
> It's strange how geography changes the meaning of things.

Yep ... when used in reference to automobiles, I always thought of it as
those areas where it was common to salt the roads in the winter.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 11/06/04

I have a 1999 Mazda B2500 which is merely a rebadged Ford Ranger. Your
wife is right. (Aren't they always?) I wish I had bought the extended
cab version. It will make the vehicle a lot more useful and it will
give you more space for your Twinkie wrappers. Since you need towing
capacity, it sounds like you need an F-150 extended cab.

Do one thing for your neighbors: stay away from those nasty diesels.
Why do diesel pick-up truck owners feel like they have to leave the
noisy, smelly things running?

Dick Durbin

John T notes:
>>a 6' bed is OK, since I can always haul with the tailgate down. But I

also want automatic and cruise. And towing capability is a must. I'm
more familiar with the Ford F-150 and GMC (chevy) S-10/S-15 series that

I used to drive. I don't know which companies other than Ford series
call their extended/crew cabs. Also, we're not looking to buy new. <<

You think a six foot bed is OK. I've recently run up on some 14 to 16
foot long poplar boards about 10" to 15" wide. I have to wait for
someone else to bring them by, because my six foot bed extends only to
eight feet with tailgate down (or a bit less in an S10). I guess I
could work out a piece of plywood stacked with cement blocks to
counterbalance, but it's a PITA.

I will agree that a club cab, at least, is essential. My S10 does not
have one. I am 6' 1" tall and somewhat porky. It is not comfortable on
longer drives.

A couple of things to think about...

Why a truck? If you aren't needing it day-to-day than it is a cost that
might not be needed. Rent them when you need them. Seriously, look at
the number of times you use it in a year and do the math. Include gas
costs Vs. a car.

Why not an SUV? I have an explorer (company provided) the new ones are
48" internal width. With both back seats folded down, sheet goods hang
out about 20 inches. When I'm not hauling sheet goods, the fully
enclosed space means that whatever I'm running errands I don't have to
worry as much about crap getting stolen out of the back.

Another consideration, get a car AND an old, cheap pickup. Liability
only on the pickup, use only when needed. Regular cab will work just
fine, and you can get the long bed.

Aw, you just like those Toyota truck commercials with Darrell Waltrip.

I'm like you, though, in my disdain for Chevy trucks. They are for
girly men who really would rather have a car. (Now, if that doesn't
start a fight, I don't know what will.)

Dick "duckin' for cover" Durbin

Have a leased 2003 Ranger of which I am going to be looking for a
replacement in about a year. Have been considering a van (Freestar).
I carry wood and other things that I am concerned would tear up a van's
interior. I have not found any good "bed liners" for a van. I am
concerned about being able to carry what I do now. However, carrying
bicycles was better with a van and it was easier to carry things I did
not want exposed. Anyone have a van now and can compare how it
services them vs. a Ranger sized truck?

John, take a ride in the Chevy, Ford and Chrysler products (dunno about
the Nissan) and then the toyota Tundra. The difference is very
noticable, and the SWMBO will prefer the Tundra hands down. You will
buy the Tundra. That's what happened to me. Might pay a little more for
it, but resale and durability will win over the long haul. You can't
beat the rice burners on those two issues. Just my opinion.

Mutt



John T wrote:
> Wow! Lots of responses...lots of them emotional too :)
> I'll try to shed some more light on my needs, or muddy up the waters
> some more:
>
> My first trucks were F-150's, al early '70s models. My only new truck

> was a '87 F-150 (then the union went on strike, and I couldn't afford
it
> anymore...). My last two trucks were GMC versions of the S-10 and
S-15.
> In the Sonoma (S-10 copy if I remember right), for sheet goods, I
rested
> them on the wheel wells and used a inverted U of 2x6's on the
tailgate.
> The wieght of the goods held it in place.
>
> I hate diesels.
> I hate bemoth SUV's (Hummer, expedition, etc).
>
> I like my Windstar minivan, but it can't carry sheet goods with the
rear
> door closed. I have to tie a rope to the plastic loop handle and the
> other end of the rope to a seat armrest.
>
> It sounds like 4 door is a must, as I must haul the kids frequently
(I
> hate driving my wifes grand-am...it hurts my back to sit in that
thing
> for extended periods), espectially on family trips.
>
> Towing capability is a must (Most trucks will easily haul our pop-up
> camper without a towing package). If I get another van, it must have
a
> factory installed towing package.
>
> Cruise and automatic tranny are required. AC is nice, but optional.
> Power steering pretty much comes standard on everything these days.
>
> we cannot afford new, so we are looking used, '99 or later. Under
20K,
> preferrably 15K.
>
> 4WD is preferred but not necessary...this'll be my hunting rig too!
>
> One of the smaller SUV's might fill the bill...I'm not familar with
> them, but I'll be looking!
>
> John

Swingman responds:

>>> One day, American vehicle manufacturers will put more emphasis on
> actually _designing_ revolutionary trucks, rather than spending all
> their money _telling_ us how "professional grade" they are. <G>


Hey, not fair! ... after all, they actually have "real 'steel alloy'
bolts
holding the bed to the frame", and they think it's such an important
feature
that they design an entire TV advertising campaign around the fact.

Can you imagine, REAL "steel alloy" bolts??


... that's how stupid they think you are.<<

Or, that is how stupid the people in the ad department and agency
REALLY are.

Bruce writes:
>> You can't haul 12 foot boards in a 5'+ bed, which is a common
> length for hardwood lumber. And you can't haul a motorcycle. In
> fact, there's lots of things which are more or less inconvenient
> in a extra-short bed truck.


> John

I have several homemade racks that slip into the box holes. These allow
me to
haul 20' stuff in my 6' bed 8^) <<

Yes, well...GM had a really brilliant idea with the S10 (and its GMC
brother). No stake holes. Nada. None. I hadn't even noticed until I
decided to get a friend to weld up some old iron the other day. Nope.
Not gonna happen with this pick-up. I guess commercial units slip down
inside, or over, the rails, with padding and some kind of clamp. What
design brilliance!

I sometimes wonder if they burned down the design and advertising
departments and locked all those employees in Bedlam if may, just
maybe, car manufacturers might turn out a better product. Wouldn't hurt
my feelings any if the clipped the vocal cords on any local announcers
who might be inclined to emote dealers' ads, too. Just clipped, don't
snip. Let 'em screech.

"Olebiker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Aw, you just like those Toyota truck commercials with Darrell Waltrip.
>
> I'm like you, though, in my disdain for Chevy trucks. They are for
> girly men who really would rather have a car. (Now, if that doesn't
> start a fight, I don't know what will.)
>
> Dick "duckin' for cover" Durbin
>

Funny how it goes!
The last three companies I have worked for bought nothing but GMC of Chevy.
The one had a fleet of twenty vehicles, all GM. Where I am now we have ten
or so trucks, one Ford in the bunch, one Dodge diesel dually. Once in a
while they would forget and buy a Ford again, but after it spent more time
in the shop than on the road it would suddenly disappear and a new GM would
be in it's place. I drove a one ton Chevy van 175,000 miles with only brakes
and tires. I got a new van and the gent that got my old one ran it to just
over 300,000 miles with similar service. No major repairs, original engine
and transmission! The company sold it for $500 as it was in need of engine
work. It burned very little oil, but the crank bearings were so worn that it
was spewing oil out both ends of the crank.

Personally I have owned two Fords and I will probably never buy another one!
My dad has owned three Fords and he is done with them too!
My next door neighbor bought one Ford, all GM in his driveway again!

The next guy will drive a Ford with disdain for GM, or drive Dodge and hate
GM or Ford.
I guess it makes the world go 'round!
Greg

my vote: Toyota Tundra crew cab. I don't think you'll find one in the
price/age range you're looking for (~$26k new, they've been out since 2000),
but if you're going to haul the family around, you will never regret it.
For what it's worth, here's a bit of what CR says about it:

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Highs: Ride, quietness, braking, smooth engine, interior quality,
reliability.
Lows: Turning circle.

Currently our top-rated full-sized pickup, the Tundra's Lexus-derived V8 is
smooth and quiet. 2005 brings a larger and more powerful V8 and a new
4.0-liter V6. The ride is civilized, the cabin is quiet and roomy in the
crew cab, and fit and finish is top-notch. The power-retractable rear window
is a nice touch. The crew cab has one of the longer beds in its class.
Four-wheel-drive versions perform well off-road. The extended-cab model has
a cramped rear seat. Good offset-crash results are a considerable plus.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Predicted reliability, owner satisfaction, and predicted depreciation are
all rated "excellent". It will tow 6,700 pounds.

You're chasing what we all want, a great used vehicle with all the features,
comfort and safety, but without one thing: the high price. I wish you good
luck in your search.

--
"Stay calm. Be brave. Wait for the signs."

regards,

Frank Johansen
Aurora, Ontario

"Dave in Fairfax" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> John T wrote:
> snip
> The base F-150s come in between $15-20K new, definitely in there
> if the dealers are trying to get rid of them. The come with AC
> and PS. AT, CC and 4WD are extra, they tow about 6K as designed.
> I like mine, it's got a non-standard rear end because I have a
> tendency to fill it with turning wood, $18K and change.

Want four doors? A crew cab 2-wheel drive XLT (base model) is more like $30
new, from what I can see.

Frank

In article <[email protected]>,
Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>"Ba r r y" wrote in message
>
>> One day, American vehicle manufacturers will put more emphasis on
>> actually _designing_ revolutionary trucks, rather than spending all
>> their money _telling_ us how "professional grade" they are. <G>
>
>Hey, not fair! ... after all, they actually have "real 'steel alloy' bolts
>holding the bed to the frame", and they think it's such an important feature
>that they design an entire TV advertising campaign around the fact.
>
>Can you imagine, REAL "steel alloy" bolts??
>

They're preferable to MAN-MADE "steel alloy" bolts, aren't they? *snicker*

In article <[email protected]>, John T
<[email protected]> wrote:

> As the OP of this thread, I'd thought I'd let you know how its going.
> The only vehicles we've found that meet our needs is a Dodge Ram 1500
> crew cab, with 77K miles, and a chrysler town and country LXi with 57K
> miles. Both are 2002's, both have "sale" prices of 15K. We thought about
> buying a trailer for the van, as its "too nice" to haul sheet goods and
> the like. We'd need a topper for the truck, so the extra expense is a wash.
>
> Our big concern is the high miles both.

"High miles"?

Cars have changed. Sixty thousand miles is just starting to reach the
"settled in" point. I bought a 2000 GMC van last spring, with 67,000
miles on it. It's a full size conversion van, tricked out with leather,
LCD screen, and all the goodies. I didn't hesitate at $14,900; didn't
even haggle on the price. I expect this van to continue running like a
top for at least 100,000 more miles.

In 1997, I bought a 1996 Chevy Lumina sedan with 79k miles on it.
Today, with 215,000 miles, it's still my daily commuter. A bad thing
happened to the transmission (unrelated to mileage), but other than
that, my only repairs have been to replace the water pump about six
months ago, and the A/C compressor (mandatory in Texas) at 175k miles.

Honestly, unless it's been used hard or abused, then anything under
90,000 miles just means you're taking advantage of someone else's lost
depreciation.

Kevin

Tue, Mar 8, 2005, 12:55pm (EST-1) [email protected] (John=A0T)
e=D7claims:
The ol' minivan needs service again. Me and the wife are seriously
considering trading in one of our cars for something newer (the car is a
'95 grand-am, the van a '96 windstar). <snip>

My daily driver is a '79 GMC pickup. The "new" truck is a '80
Chevy Luv, if the kid ever finishes working on the damn thing, that is.
But, he has a "modern" truck, that if he ever gets rid of, I want first
dibs on, a '86 Suburban 4X4. There's a nice truck for sale in town I'm
thinking about checking on, '60s Chevy pickup, shortbed, stepside, 4X4.
And, once the garage gets up, I'll be working on my '69 VW. That stoped
making good looking vehicle long ago.



JOAT
Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong.
- David Fasold

TOYOTA!!!! Although at present I do own a Ford and don't get me wrong I love
my Ford truck. But I think the longeveity of the Toyota stands out.

Just an opinion guys and we all have them.. Mine is I cannot stand Chevy
rust and rattle buckets

Searcher1

John T wrote:
snip
> I've always been a truck guy. I need a truck to haul things, including
> wood (here's the WW tie-in). Hauling sheet or long goods in the van is a
> PITA.
> The "rub" is that my wife wants to get a extended/crew cab, so the kids
> can ride along in the back with real leg room. They are 4 and 6 now.
> a 6' bed is OK, since I can always haul with the tailgate down. But I
> also want automatic and cruise. And towing capability is a must. I'm
> more familiar with the Ford F-150 and GMC (chevy) S-10/S-15 series that
> I used to drive. I don't know which companies other than Ford series
> call their extended/crew cabs. Also, we're not looking to buy new.

Sounds like you need to consider a few things. A supercab isn't
enough room once the legs start to grow, so a crewcab would be a
better idea. If you need to drag large objects behind you, you'll
probably want a F-250 or the compettitors rather than a F-150.
Balancing things to make over-long boards stay in the bed is a bad
idea, an 8' bed is a better idea, that gives you 10' with the gate
down. Buying a used vehicle is always dicey, wait until the
dealers are getting rid of the old models and bet a basic vehicle
instead.

My two sense,
Dave in Fairfax
--
Dave Leader
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/
PATINA
http://www.Patinatools.org/

Charlie Self wrote:
>
...
>
> You think a six foot bed is OK. ...

I'm w/ Charlie here...a short bed is essentially worthless, but the
extended cab makes a long-be wheelbase a pita for town use. Personally,
I'd buy the truck to be a truck and not try to make a family car out of
it. (Bought short bed 3-door for an express purpose other than hauling
thinking it would be "ok" and hate the decision. Only saving grace is
have real work truck so it's just a "goin' to town" vehicle, now.)

Tom Watson wrote:
>
...raving about Ford vs Chevy...

Just to show there's no justice in the world...

I gave my 72 Chevy C10 to friend when left TN in '99 (two already here
on the farm). It had >200k on it at the time w/ one overhaul at 130k or
thereabouts. Is still being used daily by my friend (he's semi-retired
self-employed plumber).

On the farm have '77 C10 4x4 w/ who knows how many miles--says 50k but I
have no idea how many times it's started over. It has worked every day
of it's life and the most expensive repair was a master cylinder last
fall. It's work load has not been light, either--it always has diesel
and gas tank in bed plus regularly pulls anyhdrous-ammonia trailers (the
1000 and 1500 gal jobbies that look like an LP tank on wheels) through
sandy fields as a simple task.

Meanwhile watch the neighbors go through Fords like jelly beans...

Except for the 73-75 or so time period where there was a serious design
flaw in the body that lead to rust out reminiscent of 50's and early
60's Fords, I would take the GM entry over the Ford any day.

That said, longevity is mainly how they're maintained/driven imo.

Tom Watson wrote:
>
...
> Did I happen to mention that I had a 1974 C-10?
>
> ...yeah, I thought so.


Did I happen to mention the world isn't fair?

...yeah, I thought so... :)

John T wrote:
snip
> It sounds like 4 door is a must, as I must haul the kids frequently (I
> hate driving my wifes grand-am...it hurts my back to sit in that thing
> for extended periods), espectially on family trips.
> Towing capability is a must (Most trucks will easily haul our pop-up
> camper without a towing package). If I get another van, it must have a
> factory installed towing package.
> Cruise and automatic tranny are required. AC is nice, but optional.
> Power steering pretty much comes standard on everything these days.
> we cannot afford new, so we are looking used, '99 or later. Under 20K,
> preferrably 15K.
> 4WD is preferred but not necessary...this'll be my hunting rig too!

The base F-150s come in between $15-20K new, definitely in there
if the dealers are trying to get rid of them. The come with AC
and PS. AT, CC and 4WD are extra, they tow about 6K as designed.
I like mine, it's got a non-standard rear end because I have a
tendency to fill it with turning wood, $18K and change.

Dave in Fairfax
--
Dave Leader
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/
PATINA
http://www.Patinatools.org/

Buck Frobisher wrote:
> Want four doors? A crew cab 2-wheel drive XLT (base model) is more like $30
> new, from what I can see.

Mine's got a supercab.

Dave in Fairfax
--
Dave Leader
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/
PATINA
http://www.Patinatools.org/

"John T" <said
> The "rub" is that my wife wants to get a extended/crew cab, so the kids
> can ride along in the back with real leg room. They are 4 and 6 now.
>
> a 6' bed is OK, since I can always haul with the tailgate down. But I also
> want automatic and cruise. And towing capability is a must.
> Also, we're not looking to buy new.
>
> Any opinions?

I have a 2003 Chevrolet crew cab, 4x4 dually. All the comforts of home.
Honda just introduced the new Ridgeline. It looks like a scaled down
Avalanche.

Used trucks are difficult to find in good condition, many times there are
programs available on new trucks that make it easier to afford.

Check with your local dealer for current programs before getting your mind
set.

Dave



Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

"Patriarch"
> One of the reasons I buy trucks is that I believe that they generally will
> go 200k+ miles, before becoming economically non-viable.
>
> The fact that I can haul my hobbies stuff: tools, lumber, gardening crap,
> dump run, etc. is pretty much gravy.
>
> That said, the next vehicle is a convertible. I missed the midlife crisis
> thing. My wife says I get a convertible as a reward for keeping her. (I
> think the best reward is that I don't HAVE to replace her.)
>
> Patriarch

Shiney new Corvette?

Dave



Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

My kids call those things lego trucks. My wife calls them tupperware.


Larry Jaques wrote:

>
>
> >It ain't natural.
>
> Speakin'o unnatural, my across the street neighbor just showed
> up in a Chebby Avalanche today, brand new. It's a super-super
> shortbed (4' if an inch) with a whopping FORTY ONE CUBIC FEET
> of cargo room! <bwahahahahaha>
>
> ==========================================================
> I drank WHAT? + http://www.diversify.com
> --Socrates + Web Application Programming

On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 17:53:39 -0700, John McCoy wrote
(in article <[email protected]>):


>
> You can't haul 12 foot boards in a 5'+ bed, which is a common
> length for hardwood lumber. And you can't haul a motorcycle. In
> fact, there's lots of things which are more or less inconvenient
> in a extra-short bed truck.
>
> John

I have several homemade racks that slip into the box holes. These allow me to
haul 20' stuff in my 6' bed 8^)

"Kevin Craig" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:130320051103498936%[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, John T

>
> Honestly, unless it's been used hard or abused, then anything under
> 90,000 miles just means you're taking advantage of someone else's lost
> depreciation.
>

All such bets are off in the rust belt.

Not to mention being simplistic elsewhere. 30K on Dallas freeways is a
lot more hours than 100K of my driving, where there are five possible places
where I might be obliged to slow or stop in the 37 miles to work.

"John T" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Two things...I do live in the rust belt (southern WI), and I put a
> higher number of miles per year than average, about 17-18K.
> My minivan reached 159,000 miles before the tranny and power steering
> gave out, which is the reason why I'm looking.
>
> Both vehicles are local trades.
>

If it was a Chrysler product, you should have been on your third tranny.

My last 600K have been on three past and one current (30K) Ranger. Big
pieces begin to fall off about year eight or nine, but our salt season is
longer and more intense than yours.

18K/annum? I know folks who do that on snow machines....

On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 23:28:17 -0500, "Norman D. Crow"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Because Ford ain't gonna move the front wheels under your butt, or give them
>the turn angle! Of course, if they did, it would then become a "medium size"
>TRUCK and nobody would want it except the same people who bought the Isuzu
>cab-over.

Depends on the size.

The company I work for replaced a bunch of 10', single rear wheeled,
GM cube vans with the Isuzu / Mitsubishi equivalent cab-overs for
company mail and material distribution. These are 3/4 to 1 ton
capacity vehicles, with an empty weight around 5500-6000 pounds, truly
not a medium truck. Some of them have been used completely through a
life cycle, so a good amount of data's in.

The drivers, mechanics, and bean counters all absolutely love them. A
very rare concurrence! I'm pretty sure they use rack and pinion
steering, which is one of the reasons the drivers love them.

If a truck is being purchased to be genuinely used as a small truck,
not a man-car, they're the bomb! More and more plumbers, carpenters,
electricians, you name the trade... are seeing the light.

I've owned vehicles in the man-car category at times, so this term
isn't meant to get anyone's panties in a wad. <G>

Barry

Tom Watson wrote:
>If you buy a Ford F-150 you can keep it damned near forever.


Do I m'member right that it's a minty green?

UA100, who realized lately that he has eight years/ninety
thou in/on the Jeep and a sale date is not in sight (site in
WreckSpeak)...

John McCoy wrote:

> Long trucks are a royal pain to manouever. An extended cab long
> bed truck has about a 50' turning circle (compare to 35' for a
> normal passenger car). They don't fit in parking lots very well,
> and making u-turns requires 4 lanes worth of road.

Wah.

http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/trucks/mwtruck05.jpg

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[email protected]>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/
http://rosegarden.sourceforge.net/tutorial/

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 00:57:40 -0000, John McCoy <[email protected]>
wrote:


>Now, I had one of those Isuzu cabovers a while back. It just
>about turned in it's own length. If Isuzu can make a truck
>with a 15' box so manoueverable, why can't Ford make a truck
>with an 8' bed equally so?
>
>John


I used to ask the same question. I had an E350 14' cube van and a
Mitsubishi like the Isuzu you write about.

I drove the Japanese truck once and it became bell clear why those
things pretty much killed off the American cube van. Now the
Sprinter (which is what, European Mercedes with a Dodge or
Freightliner badge?) is doing the same to the typical full-size trade
van.

One day, American vehicle manufacturers will put more emphasis on
actually _designing_ revolutionary trucks, rather than spending all
their money _telling_ us how "professional grade" they are. <G>

Barry

On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 18:49:49 -0600, Duane Bozarth
<[email protected]> wrote:


>
>Except for the 73-75 or so time period where there was a serious design
>flaw in the body that lead to rust out reminiscent of 50's and early
>60's Fords, I would take the GM entry over the Ford any day.


Did I happen to mention that I had a 1974 C-10?


...yeah, I thought so.





Thomas J. Watson - WoodDorker

tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1 (webpage)

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 08:25:21 -0600, "Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote:


>Can you imagine, REAL "steel alloy" bolts??
>
>... that's how stupid they think you are.

I'm surprised they haven't decided to make certain bolts optional,
available as part of the "professional" package.

Barry

Same problem here - need a "real truck". Tired of hauling plywood and 2x4's
in the BMW X5. I just bought a '96 Dakota SLT 4x4 with extended cab and 6
foot bed. V-8 with a 5-speed. Power everything, cruise. 85,000 miles.
$6,000. Found it on autotrader.com at a little country town used truck lot
about 20 miles from home.

My kids fit in the mini back seat just fine for trips around town (they are
14 and 16). Most borg stuff fits in the bed - plywood sits inside the bed
and on top of wheel wells, in pockets molded in by manufacturer into which a
2x4 fits. 10 foot 2by fits fine with tailgate down. I cargo strap the end
of the stack to the bumper. For longer loads, I have a bed extender that I
bought at Harbor Freight for $20. It fits in the class 3 hitch and is
basically a 4 foot beam that extends out the back, then forms a "T" onto
which long boards rest. It works great.

Put 2,000 miles on it so far and it works perfect. Nothing busted when I
bought it. Nothing busted today. And I get 15 mpg in town and 20 on the
road.

Bob

"John T" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> The ol' minivan needs service again. Me and the wife are seriously
> considering trading in one of our cars for something newer (the car is a
> '95 grand-am, the van a '96 windstar). The minivan is nice and all, but
> I've always been a truck guy. I need a truck to haul things, including
> wood (here's the WW tie-in). Hauling sheet or long goods in the van is a
> PITA.
>
> The "rub" is that my wife wants to get a extended/crew cab, so the kids
> can ride along in the back with real leg room. They are 4 and 6 now.
>
> a 6' bed is OK, since I can always haul with the tailgate down. But I also
> want automatic and cruise. And towing capability is a must. I'm more
> familiar with the Ford F-150 and GMC (chevy) S-10/S-15 series that I used
> to drive. I don't know which companies other than Ford series call their
> extended/crew cabs. Also, we're not looking to buy new.
>
> Any opinions?
>
> John
>

Bob G wrote:

> I'm like an old dog...I just can not ever see myself owning a Toyota
> or Nissan Truck... not interested in resale value ..I never sell them
> untill they stop running...

I figure by the time my Tonka Toy dies, somebody will have put on
another 250,000 miles on top of my 400,000 or so and i'll be sailing
somewhere in the South Pacific.

Lew

"Ba r r y" wrote in message

> One day, American vehicle manufacturers will put more emphasis on
> actually _designing_ revolutionary trucks, rather than spending all
> their money _telling_ us how "professional grade" they are. <G>

Hey, not fair! ... after all, they actually have "real 'steel alloy' bolts
holding the bed to the frame", and they think it's such an important feature
that they design an entire TV advertising campaign around the fact.

Can you imagine, REAL "steel alloy" bolts??

... that's how stupid they think you are.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 11/06/04

"Charlie Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message

>
> Or, that is how stupid the people in the ad department and agency
> REALLY are.
>

I was waiting for the company pickup to be inspected yesterday and was BSing
with the sales manager. He got delivery on the first Avalanche truck about a
month after they were introduced. He figured it would be gone in a matter
of days, what with all the advertising hype. Plenty of people stopped and
looked at it, admired it, but did not buy it. He though they'd make a
premium and ended up letting it go for less than he'd make on a Silverado.
In spite of the hype, people mostly still tend to buy what then really need
in a truck.

He also had an SSR and it did not move fast either. They will only sell
them with an order, none will be brought in for spec.

In article <[email protected]>, John T <[email protected]> wrote:
>The ol' minivan needs service again. Me and the wife are seriously
>considering trading in one of our cars for something newer (the car is a
>'95 grand-am, the van a '96 windstar). The minivan is nice and all, but
>I've always been a truck guy. I need a truck to haul things, including
>wood (here's the WW tie-in). Hauling sheet or long goods in the van is a
>PITA.
>
>The "rub" is that my wife wants to get a extended/crew cab, so the kids
>can ride along in the back with real leg room. They are 4 and 6 now.
>
>a 6' bed is OK, since I can always haul with the tailgate down. But I
>also want automatic and cruise. And towing capability is a must. I'm
>more familiar with the Ford F-150 and GMC (chevy) S-10/S-15 series that
>I used to drive. I don't know which companies other than Ford series
>call their extended/crew cabs. Also, we're not looking to buy new.
>
>Any opinions?

Get a Suburban. Seats up to six (even more with the optional 3rd seat), but
the seats can be folded down to give you an 8-foot-long bed that's totally
enclosed. Automatic? Cruise? Towing? No problem. They're great.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

Two things...I do live in the rust belt (southern WI), and I put a
higher number of miles per year than average, about 17-18K.
My minivan reached 159,000 miles before the tranny and power steering
gave out, which is the reason why I'm looking.

Both vehicles are local trades.

John

Look up trucks on www.edmunds.com. There is everything you want to know
about all models and you can compare specs and features until the cows come
home. The only thing you can't get is a test drive, but that can be
arranged.

Steve

"George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:b%[email protected]...
>
> "John T" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> The ol' minivan needs service again. Me and the wife are seriously
>> considering trading in one of our cars for something newer (the car is a
>> '95 grand-am, the van a '96 windstar). The minivan is nice and all, but
>> I've always been a truck guy. I need a truck to haul things, including
>> wood (here's the WW tie-in). Hauling sheet or long goods in the van is a
>> PITA.
>>
>> The "rub" is that my wife wants to get a extended/crew cab, so the kids
>> can ride along in the back with real leg room. They are 4 and 6 now.
>>
>> a 6' bed is OK, since I can always haul with the tailgate down. But I
>> also want automatic and cruise. And towing capability is a must. I'm
>> more familiar with the Ford F-150 and GMC (chevy) S-10/S-15 series that
>> I used to drive. I don't know which companies other than Ford series
>> call their extended/crew cabs. Also, we're not looking to buy new.
>>
>> Any opinions?
>>
>> John
>>
>
> You might want to give some serious consideration to the Toyota Tundra.
> I don't have a Tundra, but have a 1992 Toyota Pickup that I purchased new
> in 1992...it has cost me just over $600 in repairs (not including normal
> wear
> items like brakes) in those 13 years and is BY FAR the most reliable
> vehicle
> I have ever owned. Heck, three years back I had a brand new company car
> that didn't run anywhere near as well. Personally, I'd rather pay more up
> front
> for quality than pay for a bunch of surprise repairs.
>
> George
>
>

"Tom Watson" writes:

>If you buy a Ford F-150 you can keep it damned near forever.
>
>I am the living proof.
>
>I have owned two vehicles over the last thirty one years.
>
>The first was a 1974 Chevy C-10 and it was a total piece of shit.


Having been an industrial sales engineer charged with calling on
automotive customers, spent far too many years in the bowels of plants
that had one of the big 3 names on the sign in the front.

I chose not to buy a truck from one of them.

Don't think I made a mistake.

Lew

"Dave Hall" wrote in message

> I am not sure that I understand the "essentially useless" statement
> above unless you are talking about really heavy duty payload trucks.
> My Dakota Quadcab has a short bed. In hauling sand, gravel, shingles,
> plywood, sheetrock, and most other things, I run out of payload
> capacity long before I run out of room in the bed (and the Dakota has
> far more payload than the small trucks the OP has owned recently).

Yep, my lowly Dodge Ram extended cab with a 6' bed does what I need it to
do, and SWMBO would rather ride in it than her Toyota Avalon on a long trip
(not me, I have to pay for the gas)

As far as hauling sheetgoods and lumber in a 6' bed, simply laying a short
2x4 crosswise behind the tail gate will give a stack of 8 - 10" lumber or
plywood enough angle to keep it from shifting out the back providing you
exercise prudence in driving, as you should with any load.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 11/06/04

John T <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> The "rub" is that my wife wants to get a extended/crew cab, so the
> kids can ride along in the back with real leg room. They are 4 and 6
> now.
>

Can only add a couple of things:

1) The extended /crew is really nice; I now have a 93 Ranger with
extended -- there's not a huge amount of room back there, but kids are
ok (small adults for relatively short trips, too -- but wouldn't want to
go cross country that way). We've also had a big ol' GMC crew cab --
that's kind of overkill unless you really need that much space.

2) If you are buying used (that's how I bought the 93 Ranger), be
prepared to look a *lot*, and jump on something you like when you find
it.

Here in the pnw, used trucks seem to command a premium, and are often
beat to crap.

Regards,
JT

John T <[email protected]> wrote in news:eHmXd.4054$pb3.307
@fe03.lga:

> The ol' minivan needs service again. Me and the wife are seriously
> considering trading in one of our cars for something newer (the car is a
> '95 grand-am, the van a '96 windstar). The minivan is nice and all, but
> I've always been a truck guy. I need a truck to haul things, including
> wood (here's the WW tie-in). Hauling sheet or long goods in the van is a
> PITA.
>

I bought a GMC Sierra 1500 extended cab, with the towing package, summer of
1999. It got a new tranny after 343 total miles. Since then, 137,000
miles later, NO major mechanical work needed. Couple of power window
related issues, one of them probably related to the lowlife that decided he
needed my son's wallet from the driver's door pocket. I'd buy another one.
And I've owned GMC or Chevy pickup trucks for 40 years. But I'm not a
contractor - just a homeowner.

Semi-on topic: A couple of Saturdays ago, a fellow from the woodworker's
club responded to a posting I had for an extra firedoor/new benchtop to
give away. He wants to know how large it is, so he can take it home in the
trunk of his car. I offer to put it in the truck, and take it to his
place, since he's only 10 miles away or so. No. he thinks it will be all
right.

Shows up with, and we load it into the trunk of, a Mercedes S600. The big
V12 model. It only hangs out maybe 30". Red flag, bungees, and Bob's etc.

So get what you want to drive. Kids fit fine in the back of an extended
cab truck. At least until they are teenagers.

Patriarch

"Teamcasa" <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:

<snip>
> Used trucks are difficult to find in good condition, many times there
> are programs available on new trucks that make it easier to afford.
>

One of the reasons I buy trucks is that I believe that they generally will
go 200k+ miles, before becoming economically non-viable.

The fact that I can haul my hobbies stuff: tools, lumber, gardening crap,
dump run, etc. is pretty much gravy.

That said, the next vehicle is a convertible. I missed the midlife crisis
thing. My wife says I get a convertible as a reward for keeping her. (I
think the best reward is that I don't HAVE to replace her.)

Patriarch

"TeamCasa" <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:

<snip>
> Shiney new Corvette?
>

Naw. Prolly Euro something. Gotta have a place for golf clubs and a
weekend bag. And fit a big guy. Mebbe an Audi.

Patriarch

Larry Jaques <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

<snip>
>>It ain't natural.
>
> Speakin'o unnatural, my across the street neighbor just showed
> up in a Chebby Avalanche today, brand new. It's a super-super
> shortbed (4' if an inch) with a whopping FORTY ONE CUBIC FEET
> of cargo room! <bwahahahahaha>
>
And UGLY, too. My otherwise friendly neighbor, he of the well-stocked
woodshop, bought one of these. Otherwise, he shows reasonably good taste.

He kept the old S10 to haul stuff in.

Patriarch

John T <[email protected]> wrote in news:eHmXd.4054$pb3.307
@fe03.lga:

> The "rub" is that my wife wants to get a extended/crew cab, so the kids
> can ride along in the back with real leg room. They are 4 and 6 now.
>
> a 6' bed is OK, since I can always haul with the tailgate down. But I
> also want automatic and cruise. And towing capability is a must. I'm
> more familiar with the Ford F-150 and GMC (chevy) S-10/S-15 series that
> I used to drive. I don't know which companies other than Ford series
> call their extended/crew cabs. Also, we're not looking to buy new.


Just to add my two cents (and probably repeat stuff that's already
been said):

You've got three choices in cabs: regular, extended, and crew (the
names change some between brands). Regular cabs are all but useles,
extended cabs are ok for kids but too cramped for adults (and near-
adults). If you'll end up needing to haul full size people in the
back you'll need a crew cab with full size doors in the back.

You've got 3 choices in beds, short (~6'), long (8') and extra-short
(5' something). The crew-cab models get the extra-short bed, unless
you go for a 3/4 or 1 ton model (e.g. F250, C2500). As far as I can
tell, the extra-short bed is essentially useless. A long bed is a
huge convenience if you actually haul much stuff.

Long trucks are a royal pain to manouever. An extended cab long
bed truck has about a 50' turning circle (compare to 35' for a
normal passenger car). They don't fit in parking lots very well,
and making u-turns requires 4 lanes worth of road.

Ford & Chevy trucks have slightly higher payload capacities and
towing ratings than Dodge, and all 3 are better than Toyota (I
don't know where the new big Nissan fits in). Fords are more
likely to be "built right" from the factory, especially compared
to Chevy, but if you are lucky to get a good Chevy or Dodge, they
last well (Toyotas are probably built even better, but I don't know
enough people with them).

John

Dave Hall <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> I am not sure that I understand the "essentially useless" statement
> above unless you are talking about really heavy duty payload trucks.

You can't haul 12 foot boards in a 5'+ bed, which is a common
length for hardwood lumber. And you can't haul a motorcycle. In
fact, there's lots of things which are more or less inconvenient
in a extra-short bed truck.

John

Silvan <[email protected]> wrote in news:7NOdncIQTLSVAbLfRVn-
[email protected]:

> John McCoy wrote:
>
>> Long trucks are a royal pain to manouever. An extended cab long
>> bed truck has about a 50' turning circle (compare to 35' for a
>> normal passenger car). They don't fit in parking lots very well,
>> and making u-turns requires 4 lanes worth of road.
>
> Wah.
>
> http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/trucks/mwtruck05.jpg

Heh. Altho I've seen guys u-turn a Kenworth w/ a 53' box in not
much more space than it takes for my F150.

Now, I had one of those Isuzu cabovers a while back. It just
about turned in it's own length. If Isuzu can make a truck
with a 15' box so manoueverable, why can't Ford make a truck
with an 8' bed equally so?

John

"John T" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> The ol' minivan needs service again. Me and the wife are seriously
> considering trading in one of our cars for something newer (the car is a
> '95 grand-am, the van a '96 windstar). The minivan is nice and all, but
> I've always been a truck guy. I need a truck to haul things, including
> wood (here's the WW tie-in). Hauling sheet or long goods in the van is a
> PITA.
>
> The "rub" is that my wife wants to get a extended/crew cab, so the kids
> can ride along in the back with real leg room. They are 4 and 6 now.
>
> a 6' bed is OK, since I can always haul with the tailgate down. But I also
> want automatic and cruise. And towing capability is a must. I'm more
> familiar with the Ford F-150 and GMC (chevy) S-10/S-15 series that I used
> to drive. I don't know which companies other than Ford series call their
> extended/crew cabs. Also, we're not looking to buy new.
>
> Any opinions?
>
> John
>

John,

I have always been a Ford truck owner, so I am not sure of the other brands.
I think it will mainly depend on what you plan to haul in the truck no
matter which vendor. If you are not planning on anything more than sheet
goods, I would recommend a F-150 (1/2 ton) truck. Personally, I decided to
go for a F-250 that has a much beefier 1 ton suspension. There are times
when I carry well over a ton in the back of this truck, so it makes sense to
go to the larger capacity of the 3/4 ton truck.

IMO, going with a heavier duty truck you will foresake smoothness of ride.
I will admit, a friends 2004 F-350 rides smoother than my 96' F-250, but on
the whole it will not ride as smooth as it is designed to carry heavy loads.
They ride much better when loaded down. Most of the time, an F-150 would be
fine for what I do with the truck.

As for the extended cab as well as the automatic and cruise control, I
highly recommend them not only for comfort and space for kids, but also in
an extended cab, you can store more vaulables / things you want to keep out
of the weather (depending on your bed cover). Taking the truck on longer
trips to visit family has proven to be very fruitful in getting rid of stuff
from our house and not having the entire family crammed in the front of the
truck makes it much nicer. We picked up a portable DVD TV by Sylvania
($169) that let's the kids watch movies on the longer trips.

Since you are not looking to buy new, I would assume you have a set budget
limit in mind. I searched www.autotrader.com for a couple of months until I
found what I wanted in my price range. If you widen the search to
nation-wide, you can find some incredible deals, you just have to be willing
to go and get the truck.

Hope this helps,

David

On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 11:03:49 -0600, Kevin Craig <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Our big concern is the high miles both.
>
>"High miles"?
>
>Cars have changed. Sixty thousand miles is just starting to reach the
>"settled in" point. I bought a 2000 GMC van last spring, with 67,000
>miles on it. It's a full size conversion van, tricked out with leather,
>LCD screen, and all the goodies. I didn't hesitate at $14,900; didn't
>even haggle on the price. I expect this van to continue running like a
>top for at least 100,000 more miles.
>
>In 1997, I bought a 1996 Chevy Lumina sedan with 79k miles on it.
>Today, with 215,000 miles, it's still my daily commuter. A bad thing
>happened to the transmission (unrelated to mileage), but other than
>that, my only repairs have been to replace the water pump about six
>months ago, and the A/C compressor (mandatory in Texas) at 175k miles.
>
>Honestly, unless it's been used hard or abused, then anything under
>90,000 miles just means you're taking advantage of someone else's lost
>depreciation.
>
>Kevin
===================

My neighbor is (or was until he retired last year) the Factory Rep for
General Motors.... The General now designs their engines to last for
300,000 miles... under normal use... that is not saying you will get
that many miles but in the 60's and 70's they were expected (not
designed to last under 100,000 miles...)

My Wives 96 Caranan now is getting close to 200,000 miles on it
and I will admit that it may use 1/2 quart of oil between its
3000-4000 mile oil changes,.... who cares !

My interests are in Corvettes and 60 era GM muscle cars
(5 Corvettes and a Chevelle are in the garage now...)...
Rebuilding those engines is very possible for under $2,500
but normally 3,000 will get you a real nice rebuild... Heck a 350 Hp
zz4 SB can be purchased for $3,500 with a new engine waranty right at
the parts counter of any Chevy dealer...I can pull out the old and put
in the new engine in a weekend without any trouble..could do it in a
single day honestly... with a little help from my son ....

What I am saying is I do not take the milage as any big factor in
buying a vehicle ...I will NOT pay a premium for a low milage
vehicle...just not worth it ... in my opinion...

Just my thoughts...

Bob Griffiths

On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 02:52:37 GMT, Lew Hodgett
<[email protected]> wrote:

>"Tom Watson" writes:
>
>>If you buy a Ford F-150 you can keep it damned near forever.
>>
>>I am the living proof.
>>
>>I have owned two vehicles over the last thirty one years.
>>
>>The first was a 1974 Chevy C-10 and it was a total piece of shit.
>
>
>Having been an industrial sales engineer charged with calling on
>automotive customers, spent far too many years in the bowels of plants
>that had one of the big 3 names on the sign in the front.
>
>I chose not to buy a truck from one of them.

Which one?

"John T" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> The ol' minivan needs service again. Me and the wife are seriously
> considering trading in one of our cars for something newer (the car is a
> '95 grand-am, the van a '96 windstar). The minivan is nice and all, but
> I've always been a truck guy. I need a truck to haul things, including
> wood (here's the WW tie-in). Hauling sheet or long goods in the van is a
> PITA.
>
> The "rub" is that my wife wants to get a extended/crew cab, so the kids
> can ride along in the back with real leg room. They are 4 and 6 now.
>
> a 6' bed is OK, since I can always haul with the tailgate down. But I
> also want automatic and cruise. And towing capability is a must. I'm
> more familiar with the Ford F-150 and GMC (chevy) S-10/S-15 series that
> I used to drive. I don't know which companies other than Ford series
> call their extended/crew cabs. Also, we're not looking to buy new.
>
> Any opinions?
>
> John
>

You might want to give some serious consideration to the Toyota Tundra.
I don't have a Tundra, but have a 1992 Toyota Pickup that I purchased new
in 1992...it has cost me just over $600 in repairs (not including normal
wear
items like brakes) in those 13 years and is BY FAR the most reliable vehicle
I have ever owned. Heck, three years back I had a brand new company car
that didn't run anywhere near as well. Personally, I'd rather pay more up
front
for quality than pay for a bunch of surprise repairs.

George

"Olebiker" <[email protected]> wrote
>
> Do one thing for your neighbors: stay away from those nasty diesels.
> Why do diesel pick-up truck owners feel like they have to leave the
> noisy, smelly things running?
>
Cuz they are so hard to start?

"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> If you buy a Ford F-150 you can keep it damned near forever.
>
> I am the living proof.
>
> I have owned two vehicles over the last thirty one years.
>
> The first was a 1974 Chevy C-10 and it was a total piece of shit.
>
> The rockers rusted out within three years and the wheel wells
> cancered out soon after.
>
> I ran that miserable piece of crap, at great expense, until 1987, when
> I bought a real truck, made by the Ford Motor Company.
>
> That F-150 is still my constant companion.
>
> I drive it sixty miles a day and it has better than 150,000 miles on
> it.
>
> It runs good, is quiet, and shows no sign of quitting.
>
> I keep asking the guys at the garage that I take it to for state
> inspection and such, "How much life does it have in it?".
>
> They tell me that this old baby is only about middle aged.
>
> Buy Ford - before it's made in Shanghai.
>
> ps. Don't buy the six foot bed.
>
> It ain't natural.
>
> I'll post a pix on ABPW.
>
Ayup! My '89 is going to the great junkyard in the sky . . way over 200K,
4.9L 6 needs new lower end so the oil pressure will stay up when idling in
gear after it's hot. Big time cancer, needs new gas tank, etc. Still starts
and runs good, pulls like a bear!

Looked over a mo. for a replacement. Needed an extended cab to fit my
corpulent belly behind the wheel, wanted auto, cruise, air if I could, and
definitely a full bed! All I could find around here were those dam "toy
trucks", yuppie 4 x 4 ext. cabs & crew cabs with itty bitty beds.

Finally found "my" truck . . '95 F150, 4.9L 6, auto, air, cruise, ext. cab
full bed. It's old, but runs fine, looks decent for it's age. I'm a happy
camper!

In the meantime, SWMBO's '98 F150 ext. cab short bed w/cap has about 90K,
doing great, it's our "family" car.

--
Nahmie
Those on the cutting edge bleed a lot.

"Silvan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> John McCoy wrote:
>
> > Long trucks are a royal pain to manouever. An extended cab long
> > bed truck has about a 50' turning circle (compare to 35' for a
> > normal passenger car). They don't fit in parking lots very well,
> > and making u-turns requires 4 lanes worth of road.
>
> Wah.
>
> http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/trucks/mwtruck05.jpg
>
Yer preachin' to the choir, Mike. Stretch that "little" truck out with a
hood & stick a set of training wheels under the back end, then try and get
around downtown NYC!(LOL)

Some yrs. back, SIL and our boss were running two rigs to CA, got out in
AZ(Flagstaff) and somebody wanted to know what those "East Coast trucks were
doing out there with the "big" trucks". SIL told 'em . . "Our boss only
hires professional drivers, we don't need those training wheels". Sorta shut
the CB down for a couple min.(Of course, this happened while SIL & boss were
both out cruising in the hammer lane through 4" fresh snow)

--
Nahmie
Those on the cutting edge bleed a lot.

"John McCoy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Silvan <[email protected]> wrote in
news:7NOdncIQTLSVAbLfRVn-
> [email protected]:
>
> > John McCoy wrote:
> >
> >> Long trucks are a royal pain to manouever. An extended cab long
> >> bed truck has about a 50' turning circle (compare to 35' for a
> >> normal passenger car). They don't fit in parking lots very well,
> >> and making u-turns requires 4 lanes worth of road.
> >
> > Wah.
> >
> > http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/trucks/mwtruck05.jpg
>
> Heh. Altho I've seen guys u-turn a Kenworth w/ a 53' box in not
> much more space than it takes for my F150.
>
> Now, I had one of those Isuzu cabovers a while back. It just
> about turned in it's own length. If Isuzu can make a truck
> with a 15' box so manoueverable, why can't Ford make a truck
> with an 8' bed equally so?
>
Because Ford ain't gonna move the front wheels under your butt, or give them
the turn angle! Of course, if they did, it would then become a "medium size"
TRUCK and nobody would want it except the same people who bought the Isuzu
cab-over.

--
Nahmie
Those on the cutting edge bleed a lot.

John T <[email protected]> wrote:
> The "rub" is that my wife wants to get a extended/crew cab, so the kids
> can ride along in the back with real leg room. They are 4 and 6 now.

Since you are a "truck guy" you may not like this idea. How
about a nice 4-door sedan and a utility trailer? You get the
comfort and drivability of a car, and hauling capacity when
you need it. I did this for years and it really worked well
for me.

Bill Ranck
Blacskburg, Va.

John T <[email protected]> wrote:
> As the OP of this thread, I'd thought I'd let you know how its going.
> The only vehicles we've found that meet our needs is a Dodge Ram 1500
> crew cab, with 77K miles, and a chrysler town and country LXi with 57K
> miles. Both are 2002's, both have "sale" prices of 15K. We thought about
> buying a trailer for the van, as its "too nice" to haul sheet goods and
> the like. We'd need a topper for the truck, so the extra expense is a wash.

> Our big concern is the high miles both.

High miles? The only thing hile mileage about those are
that they are kind of high on a per-year basis, but they
could easily be 3.5 years old. They start selling new models
about July or August these days. For me, high miles-per-year
are generally a *good* thing. It usually means a lot of easy
highway mileage and not a lot of short trips (unless it was
a delivery van/truck). I'd go for the Town & Country with
a utility trailer for the occasional hauling of sheet goods, etc.

Like I said previously. I used that method for many years
when my kids were growing up and it worked well. I even
had extra luggage capacity by using the trailer on long
family trips or when hauling them to college. I had a
Maxima, not a minvan, but the idea is the same. Creature
comfort for day-to-day and hauling capacity only when
needed.

Bill Ranck
Blacksburg, Va.

On 8 Mar 2005 11:18:56 -0800, "Charlie Self" <[email protected]>
scribbled:

>You think a six foot bed is OK. I've recently run up on some 14 to 16
>foot long poplar boards about 10" to 15" wide. I have to wait for
>someone else to bring them by, because my six foot bed extends only to
>eight feet with tailgate down (or a bit less in an S10). I guess I
>could work out a piece of plywood stacked with cement blocks to
>counterbalance, but it's a PITA.

I agree on the eight-foot bed. It's hard to fit a quartered (actually
sixthed) moose in one layer in a smaller bed. But you should consider
having an operable rear window. For a small number of long sticks,
it's great to be able to open the window and slide one end of the wood
in the cab and the other end resting on the tailgate.

Also, I bought a pair of roof racks, tossed one and install the other
on the cab roof when needed. To match it, (OBWW) I made a rack out of
doug fir that fits in the stake holes (Izzat what they're called?).
Planed some 2X3 down to the required size, screwed on a couple of
gussets and a spacer to hold the cross beam (think open mortise or
bridle joint), and a 2X4 bolted on as the cross beam. Once stuff is
tied down, it's pretty rigid. Works great for larger numbers of long
pieces of wood or a canoe.

1990 Chevy 2500 4X4 extended cab, manual tranny & no cruise control or
A/C. Bought at a government auction in 1996 for $CDN7,500 ($12k book
value at the time). Bench seats are not that comfortable, but the
extended cab is OK for a couple of people if I remove the junk that's
usually on it.

Luigi
Replace "nonet" with "yukonomics" for real email address
www.yukonomics.ca/wooddorking/humour.html
www.yukonomics.ca/wooddorking/humour.html

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 00:53:39 -0000, John McCoy <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Dave Hall <[email protected]> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>> I am not sure that I understand the "essentially useless" statement
>> above unless you are talking about really heavy duty payload trucks.
>
>You can't haul 12 foot boards in a 5'+ bed, which is a common
>length for hardwood lumber. And you can't haul a motorcycle. In
>fact, there's lots of things which are more or less inconvenient
>in a extra-short bed truck.
>
>John

Ahhhh, inconvienient vs "esentially useless" I can understand. We all
have to make some kinds of trade-offs in our vehicle selections, I
assume. I have never tried to haul any motorcycles so I don't really
know how long they are. With one of those bed extender cages my Dakota
bed length with the tailgate down and the cage flipped becomes about 7
ft or so "enclosed" but that might not be enough. It will haul a 4
wheeler though as I have done that a few times. I have hauled a fair
amount of 10'+ oak, cherry and walnut and never had any problems.
Don't think I have hauled any 12' though. I will admit that for me the
hauling capacity is a lower tradeoff for the passenger capacity. I
needed to be able to pull my boat and jetskis (up wet ramps so 4 WD
was needed), be able to take both grandsons with me (with the required
car seats that don't fit on "jump seats" like my previous Ranger
extended cab had), and haul some stuff once in a while. The Dakota was
the best trade-offs to meet those needs in that order at the time.
There are now several "mid-sized" trucks with quad-cab capacities on
the market so the Dakota might no longer be the vehicle of choice for
me. However, it being a 2000 model, I won't be looking at the market
for several more years.

Dave Hall

As the OP of this thread, I'd thought I'd let you know how its going.
The only vehicles we've found that meet our needs is a Dodge Ram 1500
crew cab, with 77K miles, and a chrysler town and country LXi with 57K
miles. Both are 2002's, both have "sale" prices of 15K. We thought about
buying a trailer for the van, as its "too nice" to haul sheet goods and
the like. We'd need a topper for the truck, so the extra expense is a wash.

Our big concern is the high miles both.
We are going to look some more at vehicles with higher prices, hoping to
find lower miles and that the bank will give use the extra money.

what to do, what to do??

John

To be honest my wife had absolutely no say in what truck I
purchased...she does not drive it...OR USE IT..

But

I had no say in what she drives either...(A Mini Van).. I do not drive
it. or use it. BUT I do ride in it alot..when she takes me out to
dinner (she does not like 4 letter words..."cook" is one of those 4
letter words.....

I have no use for anything bigger then a standard cab...
I can get by with a 6 ft bed with little or no trouble...
I have to have A/C & a Radio

Thats it....

I have always had at least on truck around the house for the last
35-40 years...My neighbor was the GMC Factory Truck Rep before he
retired years ago... so I was able to purchase OLD (like 6 month old
program trucks direct from GM for years for about 1/2 the sticker
price.. until GM stopped issuing program vehicels to their Factory
Reps.. Oh well good things never last...

I now drive a little 2002 Dodge Dakota 3.9 V6 ...It serves my needs
BUT to be honest is very underpowered..and geared completely wrong for
a truck.. I rarely need a lot of strong low end power...if I did I
would be up the creek without the paddle or the canoe ..if you get my
drift....should have got a V8...

I'm like an old dog...I just can not ever see myself owning a Toyota
or Nissan Truck... not interested in resale value ..I never sell them
untill they stop running...

Bob Griffiths

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 00:53:39 -0000, John McCoy <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Dave Hall <[email protected]> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>> I am not sure that I understand the "essentially useless" statement
>> above unless you are talking about really heavy duty payload trucks.
>
>You can't haul 12 foot boards in a 5'+ bed, which is a common
>length for hardwood lumber. And you can't haul a motorcycle. In
>fact, there's lots of things which are more or less inconvenient
>in a extra-short bed truck.

It won't help with a motorcycle, but hardwood, conduit, and pipe is
moved nicely with a removable ladder rack. In fact, the Weather
Guard Weekender:
<http://www.americanladders.com/truck_racks.html>
and many of the track racks:
<http://www.worktrucksupply.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=TT&Category_Code=tracrac>
come on and off of the vehicle in seconds. They work great for canoes
and larger kayaks as well, which still are a pain in an 8' bed.
Either rack will work with 5, 6 or 8 foot beds.

I have always had 6' beds, as that's as long as Toyota and Nissan have
recently made them on compact trucks, and the rack is essential.
I've always needed good mileage when the truck is empty, or lightly
loaded, so full size never fit my plan.

A motorcycle, mower, or other small motor vehicle fits nicely in my
5x10' box trailer, and it's MUCH easier to load. After owning a
trailer, I'd never go back to getting power equipment up into a
pickup! <G>

FWIW, My Subaru Outback has hauled plenty of hardwood, including 10'
boards INSIDE with all the doors shut. 12 footers go on the roof
rack. While I would personally pass on an extra short bed truck,
there's ways to accessorize them to conveniently haul a lot of stuff.

You payz your money...

Barry

"Bob G." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >
> What I am saying is I do not take the milage as any big factor in
> buying a vehicle ...I will NOT pay a premium for a low milage
> vehicle...just not worth it ... in my opinion...
>
> Just my thoughts...
>
> Bob Griffiths

It is not the miles, it is how the miles were driven. I've gone back to
using my '91 Regal for my daily commute because I want to get some use
before it rots away. Only 142,000 and runs as good as the day it was new.
It is on the second set of plugs though. The original were replaced at
about 85,000 miles. Still has the original exhaust on it also. It lacks
some of the fancy goodies that my new car has, but I still like the way this
one handles and rides. Best part is it has been paid for over 10 years now.
Lots of highway miles.

George wrote:


> If it was a Chrysler product, you should have been on your third tranny.

If you want an argument, change the subject<G>.


> My last 600K have been on three past and one current (30K) Ranger. Big
> pieces begin to fall off about year eight or nine, but our salt season is
> longer and more intense than yours.

When I lived in the rust belt, would get a new vehicle, drive it 60,000
miles to the nearest junk yard and get in the next new car the dealer
had waiting for me.

Here in SoCal, at 95,000, the little Tonka Toy finally got a set of
front brakes and some plugs the other day.

Road salt and cold weather have a major impact on vehicle longevity.


> 18K/annum? I know folks who do that on snow machines....

Here in SoCal, a commute of 50-100 miles each way is no big news, thus
30K-60K miles per year is NBD.


Lew

Wow! Lots of responses...lots of them emotional too :)
I'll try to shed some more light on my needs, or muddy up the waters
some more:

My first trucks were F-150's, al early '70s models. My only new truck
was a '87 F-150 (then the union went on strike, and I couldn't afford it
anymore...). My last two trucks were GMC versions of the S-10 and S-15.
In the Sonoma (S-10 copy if I remember right), for sheet goods, I rested
them on the wheel wells and used a inverted U of 2x6's on the tailgate.
The wieght of the goods held it in place.

I hate diesels.
I hate bemoth SUV's (Hummer, expedition, etc).

I like my Windstar minivan, but it can't carry sheet goods with the rear
door closed. I have to tie a rope to the plastic loop handle and the
other end of the rope to a seat armrest.

It sounds like 4 door is a must, as I must haul the kids frequently (I
hate driving my wifes grand-am...it hurts my back to sit in that thing
for extended periods), espectially on family trips.

Towing capability is a must (Most trucks will easily haul our pop-up
camper without a towing package). If I get another van, it must have a
factory installed towing package.

Cruise and automatic tranny are required. AC is nice, but optional.
Power steering pretty much comes standard on everything these days.

we cannot afford new, so we are looking used, '99 or later. Under 20K,
preferrably 15K.

4WD is preferred but not necessary...this'll be my hunting rig too!

One of the smaller SUV's might fill the bill...I'm not familar with
them, but I'll be looking!

John

On 12 Mar 2005 07:16:35 -0800, "Charlie Self" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>I sometimes wonder if they burned down the design and advertising
>departments and locked all those employees in Bedlam if may, just
>maybe, car manufacturers might turn out a better product.

My sentiments exactly. <G>

Barry

If you buy a Ford F-150 you can keep it damned near forever.

I am the living proof.

I have owned two vehicles over the last thirty one years.

The first was a 1974 Chevy C-10 and it was a total piece of shit.

The rockers rusted out within three years and the wheel wells
cancered out soon after.

I ran that miserable piece of crap, at great expense, until 1987, when
I bought a real truck, made by the Ford Motor Company.

That F-150 is still my constant companion.

I drive it sixty miles a day and it has better than 150,000 miles on
it.

It runs good, is quiet, and shows no sign of quitting.

I keep asking the guys at the garage that I take it to for state
inspection and such, "How much life does it have in it?".

They tell me that this old baby is only about middle aged.

Buy Ford - before it's made in Shanghai.

ps. Don't buy the six foot bed.

It ain't natural.

I'll post a pix on ABPW.









On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 12:55:19 -0600, John T
<[email protected]> wrote:

>The ol' minivan needs service again. Me and the wife are seriously
>considering trading in one of our cars for something newer (the car is a
>'95 grand-am, the van a '96 windstar). The minivan is nice and all, but
>I've always been a truck guy. I need a truck to haul things, including
>wood (here's the WW tie-in). Hauling sheet or long goods in the van is a
>PITA.
>
>The "rub" is that my wife wants to get a extended/crew cab, so the kids
>can ride along in the back with real leg room. They are 4 and 6 now.
>
>a 6' bed is OK, since I can always haul with the tailgate down. But I
>also want automatic and cruise. And towing capability is a must. I'm
>more familiar with the Ford F-150 and GMC (chevy) S-10/S-15 series that
>I used to drive. I don't know which companies other than Ford series
>call their extended/crew cabs. Also, we're not looking to buy new.
>
>Any opinions?
>
>John

Thomas J. Watson - WoodDorker

tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1 (webpage)

"Scott Lurndal" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Unfortunately, the base model price has increased 50% since december 1999.
>
> scott

Yeah, but they give it all back to you in discounts. They are giving Rangers
away around here (Maine), even 4x4s.

Back on topic, if the OP is looking for rear legroom, the Ranger is out. I
only got the XC because the front seats go back further. I would never
subject a human to those jump seats - I don't even put my dog back there.

"Searcher1" <[email protected]> writes:
>TOYOTA!!!! Although at present I do own a Ford and don't get me wrong I love
>my Ford truck. But I think the longeveity of the Toyota stands out.

I've been really pleased with my 2000 Ranger (base model, short bed - no frills). 70k
miles so far with nary a problem. Orignal brakes, tires and clutch. Sure,
it has no air conditioning (don't need it in the Bay Area), no cruise
control and no power anything, but at under $10k new, who's complaining?

Compared to the competition (S10/Toyota/Nissan), it had greater ground
clearance and a higher cab which made it more comfortable for tall people.

Unfortunately, the base model price has increased 50% since december 1999.

scott

On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 13:12:41 -0500, "George" <george@least> wrote:


>All such bets are off in the rust belt.

I always thought "Rust Belt" referred to the areas that held America's
lost steel industry, not that things actually rusted more in a certain
area. <G>

It's strange how geography changes the meaning of things.

Barry

On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 12:55:19 -0600, John T <[email protected]>
wrote:

>The ol' minivan needs service again. Me and the wife are seriously
>considering trading in one of our cars for something newer (the car is a
>'95 grand-am, the van a '96 windstar). The minivan is nice and all, but
>I've always been a truck guy. I need a truck to haul things, including
>wood (here's the WW tie-in). Hauling sheet or long goods in the van is a
>PITA.
>
>The "rub" is that my wife wants to get a extended/crew cab, so the kids
>can ride along in the back with real leg room. They are 4 and 6 now.
>
>a 6' bed is OK, since I can always haul with the tailgate down. But I
>also want automatic and cruise. And towing capability is a must. I'm
>more familiar with the Ford F-150 and GMC (chevy) S-10/S-15 series that
>I used to drive. I don't know which companies other than Ford series
>call their extended/crew cabs. Also, we're not looking to buy new.
>
>Any opinions?
>
>John

I've had my F-150 Club Cab since 97. The club cab is not all that bad,
even for adults in the back seat. The 6' bed hasn't been a major issue,
you have to be careful hauling sheet goods; I haul them with the tailgate
up since an unfortunate incident with some melamine covered hardboard
sheets. For really long boards, I'd look at adding a frame up front and
extending them from the back of the pickup to the front over the cab and
lashing them to the frame. When looking, I looked at the Ranger,but the
back only had jump seats and we wanted the option of being able to carry
adults (it's come in handy quite often).

Don't know if things have changed, but my first choice was used. I
looked for several months and all I found were pickups that had over 70 to
80k miles on them and were priced at about $4k less than new -- hardly
worth the less than 20% savings for a vehicle that was probably more than
50% used up. Finally wound up buying new; since I try to use vehicles as
long as possible, it seemed the most cost-effective approach.




+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
The absence of accidents does not mean the presence of safety
Army General Richard Cody
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 12:55:19 -0600, John T
<[email protected]> wrote:

>The ol' minivan needs service again. Me and the wife are seriously
>considering trading in one of our cars for something newer (the car is a
>'95 grand-am, the van a '96 windstar). The minivan is nice and all, but
>I've always been a truck guy. I need a truck to haul things, including
>wood (here's the WW tie-in). Hauling sheet or long goods in the van is a
>PITA.

I (legally) hauled some 16' long 8" x 12" timbers in my '86 Suburban
by dropping the tailgate and rear seats and sticking the beams betwwen
the bucket seats up against the windshield. Couldn't have moved them
with a PU. But I digress...
>
>The "rub" is that my wife wants to get a extended/crew cab, so the kids
>can ride along in the back with real leg room. They are 4 and 6 now.
>
>a 6' bed is OK, since I can always haul with the tailgate down. But I
>also want automatic and cruise. And towing capability is a must. I'm
>more familiar with the Ford F-150 and GMC (chevy) S-10/S-15 series that
>I used to drive. I don't know which companies other than Ford series
>call their extended/crew cabs. Also, we're not looking to buy new.

All of the manufacturers call them about the same thing. With four
full-sized doors, they're "crew cabs" with no or smaller doors,
they're extra cabs, or extended cabs.

I know more about GMs since I've owned several and am a GM retiree so
I get preferential pricing on new ones. The truck "belongs to" SWMBO
and the Camaro is "mine." She likes, and feels safer in, her big
vehicle. "Her" current truck is a '98 Chevy 2500HD, 4X4, extended
cab/short bed (6 1/2'), with a 454 cid and 4L80E transmission. She
would like a full crew cab that would be more comfy for guest
passengers. Don't blame her, but I would want to stay with a short
bed cuz my workshop shares space with the vehicles and a workbench and
drill press would have to move to get a long bed truck in the garage.

We also tow a 23' fifth wheel trailer, so towing capacity is a concern
for us too. We looked at a 2004 Silverado but it only had a 6 liter
engine and frankly SWMBO preferred her truck. I am tempted to look at
a Ford V-10, although have not done so yet.

I personally would not ever consider a Dodge, nor would I be socially
irresponsible and buy a diesel of any stripe. (The first stage of
exhaust filtration on diesels should be to run the exhaust into the
cab before releasing it into the atmosphere.) To diesel owners who
would like argue this point I make the following offer. *You* can
drive my Camaro with the t-tops off and windows down and *I* will
drive your truck. We will drive side-by-side in traffic and do a few
stop and goes at traffic lights. Unfortunately for you I will remove
my firearms from the car before doing this experiment.

Used trucks are a bargain at the moment, since new ones are coming
with so many incentives. One other reason we didn't buy the new one
was the low-ball trade-in offer.

Check the NHTSA web site for gripes for any vehicles that you might
consider. For example the brakes on my truck suck and it's a birth
defect, seeming beyond GM's capability to fix. Likewise an engine
(454) knock problem at cold start. GM transmissions (the "E"s)
however, are almost bullet proof to my knowledge. They self-diagnose
and self-protect nearly flawlessly.

If you are considering serious towing then don't skimp on GVWR or
horsepower. Too many folks are towing with too much tail and too
little dog. Also consider that you have a couple of little ones and a
couple of mpg difference isn't important if a larger vehicle offers
more safety.

On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 17:26:36 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
<[email protected]> wrote:

>John T <[email protected]> wrote in news:eHmXd.4054$pb3.307
>@fe03.lga:
>
>> The "rub" is that my wife wants to get a extended/crew cab, so the kids
>> can ride along in the back with real leg room. They are 4 and 6 now.
>>
>> a 6' bed is OK, since I can always haul with the tailgate down. But I
>> also want automatic and cruise. And towing capability is a must. I'm
>> more familiar with the Ford F-150 and GMC (chevy) S-10/S-15 series that
>> I used to drive. I don't know which companies other than Ford series
>> call their extended/crew cabs. Also, we're not looking to buy new.
>
>
>Just to add my two cents (and probably repeat stuff that's already
>been said):
>
>You've got three choices in cabs: regular, extended, and crew (the
>names change some between brands). Regular cabs are all but useles,
>extended cabs are ok for kids but too cramped for adults (and near-
>adults). If you'll end up needing to haul full size people in the
>back you'll need a crew cab with full size doors in the back.
>
>You've got 3 choices in beds, short (~6'), long (8') and extra-short
>(5' something). The crew-cab models get the extra-short bed, unless
>you go for a 3/4 or 1 ton model (e.g. F250, C2500). As far as I can
>tell, the extra-short bed is essentially useless. A long bed is a
>huge convenience if you actually haul much stuff.

I am not sure that I understand the "essentially useless" statement
above unless you are talking about really heavy duty payload trucks.
My Dakota Quadcab has a short bed. In hauling sand, gravel, shingles,
plywood, sheetrock, and most other things, I run out of payload
capacity long before I run out of room in the bed (and the Dakota has
far more payload than the small trucks the OP has owned recently).
About the only time I miss a long-bed is when helping someone move
(wait a minute - that lack of capacity when other people are moving is
a GOOD thing). Seriously, it only seems to be an issue when hauling
relatively light things because I run out of room in the bed before
maxing out the payload. I guess it might also be an issue if I hauled
12' sheetrock or something else long that needed more support.

Dave Hall

>Long trucks are a royal pain to manouever. An extended cab long
>bed truck has about a 50' turning circle (compare to 35' for a
>normal passenger car). They don't fit in parking lots very well,
>and making u-turns requires 4 lanes worth of road.
>
>Ford & Chevy trucks have slightly higher payload capacities and
>towing ratings than Dodge, and all 3 are better than Toyota (I
>don't know where the new big Nissan fits in). Fords are more
>likely to be "built right" from the factory, especially compared
>to Chevy, but if you are lucky to get a good Chevy or Dodge, they
>last well (Toyotas are probably built even better, but I don't know
>enough people with them).
>
>John

In article <[email protected]>,
John T <[email protected]> wrote:

\.
>
> Any opinions?
> ,,,

John if you are talking used, a 3/4 ton (F250, etc) is only a few
hundred more then a 1/2 ton, and the difference in tow rating... well,
my ol F150 was rated at 7000 lbs, my F250 is rated at over 13,000 lbs.
If tow rating is really important, get a 3/4 ton
Get the long bed, yes it is harder to park, but...
Get a 2WD, it will be harder to find, since most people want a toy (ie
short bed 4wd) not a work truck

--
--------------------------------------------------------
Personal e-mail is the n7bsn but at amsat.org
This posting address is a spam-trap and seldom read
RV and Camping FAQ can be found at
http://www.ralphandellen.us/rv

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 03:29:40 GMT, Lew Hodgett
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Bob G wrote:
>
>> I'm like an old dog...I just can not ever see myself owning a Toyota
>> or Nissan Truck... not interested in resale value ..I never sell them
>> untill they stop running...
>
>I figure by the time my Tonka Toy dies, somebody will have put on
>another 250,000 miles on top of my 400,000 or so and i'll be sailing
>somewhere in the South Pacific.
>
>Lew

I just ordered an '05 Tacoma. Let's hope they still make 'em like my
old Toys.

Barry

On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 12:55:19 -0600, John T
<[email protected]> wrote:

>The ol' minivan needs service again. Me and the wife are seriously
>considering trading in one of our cars for something newer (the car is a
>'95 grand-am, the van a '96 windstar). The minivan is nice and all, but
>I've always been a truck guy. I need a truck to haul things, including
>wood (here's the WW tie-in). Hauling sheet or long goods in the van is a
>PITA.
>
>The "rub" is that my wife wants to get a extended/crew cab, so the kids
>can ride along in the back with real leg room. They are 4 and 6 now.
>
>a 6' bed is OK, since I can always haul with the tailgate down. But I
>also want automatic and cruise. And towing capability is a must. I'm
>more familiar with the Ford F-150 and GMC (chevy) S-10/S-15 series that
>I used to drive. I don't know which companies other than Ford series
>call their extended/crew cabs. Also, we're not looking to buy new.
>
>Any opinions?
>
>John

I have a 2000 Dodge Dakota Quad-cab that I really like. It has as much
rear seating and leg room as my mother's Caddy Seville. I can have 5
adults in the truck. However I have it because I have two grandsons
(age 5 & 6) and you need real space for those damn booster seats.
Anyhow, with the 4.7 engine I have a load capacity of in excess of
1500 lbs and a towing capacity in excess of 6,000 lbs. I think the bed
is only 5' 8" or something like that and a full sheet of plywood has
to go above the wheel wells (holders are built-in for 2x4 braces to
hold said plywood). Anyhow, it is a reasonable compromise between a
small truck that can't have a decent back seat and a full size that
may be bigger than you want. There are a few others in that range out
now, but on the used market of more than 2 or 3 years old, the Dakota
is pretty much in its own class.

Dave Hall

I have wanted a truck for a long time. Due to periods of unemployment
I put it off. Now that gasoline will likely reach $3 a gallon, I'm
more likely to keep my Honda Civic and pay for an occasional delivery
or truck rental. Glad my PM 66 does not use gasoline!

On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 20:10:32 -0600, Patriarch
<[email protected]> wrote:

>"TeamCasa" <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
><snip>
>> Shiney new Corvette?
>>
>
>Naw. Prolly Euro something. Gotta have a place for golf clubs and a
>weekend bag. And fit a big guy. Mebbe an Audi.
>
>Patriarch

John T wrote:
> The ol' minivan needs service again. Me and the wife are seriously
> considering trading in one of our cars for something newer (the car is a
> '95 grand-am, the van a '96 windstar). The minivan is nice and all, but
> I've always been a truck guy. I need a truck to haul things, including
> wood (here's the WW tie-in). Hauling sheet or long goods in the van is a
> PITA.

<snip>

If you need a truck to haul things, fine.

If you need a family vehicle, you appear to already have another vehicle
for that purpose.

SFWIW, when my Volkswagen Diesel Rabbit died in 1999, I got a "1999
Tonka Toy", AKA: A 4 cyl, 5 speed stick shift, Toyota Tacoma with a
decent FM radio.

As this is being written, have 95,000 miles on it.

Building a boat requires that you haul a lot of stuff including about
12,000 lbs of spent lead from a shooting range as an example, but it
doesn't require hauling a lot of crew. One comfortable bench seat works
just fine.

To date, have replaced the battery, four(4) tires and a set of
windshield wipers.

Change the oil and oil filter every 3,000 miles, the air filter every 6,000.

Guess I ought to think about having a tune up and maybe some new brakes,
but I'm still getting over 25 MPG in SoCal traffic which is not to shabby.

YMMV

Lew

On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 02:52:37 GMT, the inscrutable Lew Hodgett
<[email protected]> spake:

>"Tom Watson" writes:
>
>>If you buy a Ford F-150 you can keep it damned near forever.
>>
>>I am the living proof.
>>
>>I have owned two vehicles over the last thirty one years.
>>
>>The first was a 1974 Chevy C-10 and it was a total piece of shit.
>
>
>Having been an industrial sales engineer charged with calling on
>automotive customers, spent far too many years in the bowels of plants
>that had one of the big 3 names on the sign in the front.
>
>I chose not to buy a truck from one of them.
>
>Don't think I made a mistake.

Yabbut that Yugo Fleetside of yours doesn't win any Motor Trend
awards.

LJ--who'd happily drive a Unimog as his backup vehicle if he could
afford one.


==========================================================
I drank WHAT? + http://www.diversify.com
--Socrates + Web Application Programming

"Unisaw A100" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> UA100, who realized lately that he has eight years/ninety
> thou in/on the Jeep and a sale date is not in sight (site in
> WreckSpeak)...

What kind?
Can't imagine hauling twobys and sheets in a Wrangler (YJ/TJ).

I'm able to throw stuff on top of my XJ...

On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 19:38:12 -0500, the inscrutable Tom Watson
<[email protected]> spake:

>If you buy a Ford F-150 you can keep it damned near forever.
>
>I am the living proof.

Amen, bruddah.


>I have owned two vehicles over the last thirty one years.
>
>The first was a 1974 Chevy C-10 and it was a total piece of shit.
>
>The rockers rusted out within three years and the wheel wells
>cancered out soon after.
>
>I ran that miserable piece of crap, at great expense, until 1987, when
>I bought a real truck, made by the Ford Motor Company.

Boo! and Yea!, respectively.


>That F-150 is still my constant companion.
>
>I drive it sixty miles a day and it has better than 150,000 miles on
>it.

My 90' F-150 has 106,895 on it as of today. I made a trip to Medford
and noticed a horrible, musty, coolant smell. I found a pinhole leak
in the heater hose. Imagine that, those cheap hoses only lasting that
few miles and fewer than 15 years. Should I sue Ford?

>It runs good, is quiet, and shows no sign of quitting.
>
>I keep asking the guys at the garage that I take it to for state
>inspection and such, "How much life does it have in it?".
>
>They tell me that this old baby is only about middle aged.
>
>Buy Ford - before it's made in Shanghai.

Have you seen the PRICE on today's F-150? They start at over
twice what I paid.


>ps. Don't buy the six foot bed.

I have the shortbed (a manly 7') and it turns circles tighter than
my sister's '73 MGB-GT, which is now for sale (in case you're
branching out into imports for fun and profit.)


>It ain't natural.

Speakin'o unnatural, my across the street neighbor just showed
up in a Chebby Avalanche today, brand new. It's a super-super
shortbed (4' if an inch) with a whopping FORTY ONE CUBIC FEET
of cargo room! <bwahahahahaha>



==========================================================
I drank WHAT? + http://www.diversify.com
--Socrates + Web Application Programming

Any of the Chevy's or Fords from 98 or so come in
the "extended cab" and all are fairly easy to find
in just about any configuration. The crew cab comes
with a FULL four doors and the extended cabs come
with the partial doors and I don't find the partial
doors to be any show stopper. The full crew cabs
get TOP money on resell.

Small kids like yours will do fine in a "standard"
extended cab.

I would not fool with the "smaller trucks" since you
can get a full size for about the same money.


John T wrote:

> The ol' minivan needs service again. Me and the wife are seriously
> considering trading in one of our cars for something newer (the car is a
> '95 grand-am, the van a '96 windstar).