# What truck would you pick?



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

Drawing on the success of 'car would you pick' thread...
I'm in need of a new vehicle, something I can use for work and family. A truck, crew cab, so I can accommodate the family and keep all my crap contained. I'm thinking the Ford 2.7 or 3.5L Ecoboost, probably a XLT so it isn't fully loaded but has something above the basics.
I took a 5L V8, 3.5L V6 and 3.5L Eco out today and it seems like the Eco is heads and tails above the other two in power and handling. I'll go back after sleeping on it and drive the 2.7 Eco and 3.5 Eco, compare them back to back. I'm thinking since I don't need to tow anything, or if I do it will be very minor and infrequent, the 2.7 might be a better bet.
Thoughts and possible recommendations?


----------



## LanceT (Mar 7, 2014)

I think the 2.7 only comes in the 5.5' box in 4x4 trim in case this matters.
I've heard plenty on the differences between the 5.0 litre and the two Ecoboost engines in terms of fuel mileage, with there being no real differences between them and in some areas, the V8 did better.
I have a 2012 with the 3.5 Ecoboost and it's been pretty good overall & can seriously haul a$$ when required. The mileage has been acceptable and the truck is comfortable, plenty roomy and drives nice. I tow a 19' travel trailer and the combo is well matched.
I don't think you can go wrong with any of the choices.


----------



## cboutilier (Jan 12, 2016)

Our 2011 Ecoboost wasn't nearly as good on fuel as advertised, and was terrible on fuel with a load on. It also had both turbos die within 5 years. If I were buying a ford it would be a 5.0L.


----------



## Lincoln (Jun 2, 2008)

I've got the 5.0 in a F150 4x4. Average stop & go mostly city driving it sits around 14 to 14.5 liters per 100 kms. On a long trip, at around 100 kph it gets just under 11 L/100Kms. 10.8 to 10.9 range. at 120 kph, it drops to approx. 11.5 L/100Kms.
130 kph, it drops to 12 L/100Kms.
With my 12ft job trailer on, it gets 14.5 to 15 L/100 kms. One of the kids has the 3.5 eco boost in the same truck. When he has his job trailer on his mileage drops to something in the 17L/100Kms range but he drives like a banshee on fire. You can't even feel the trailer on the back, the turbo makes up for the extra weight.
In a drag race.....my 5.0 leads till we hit about 70kph, and then the eco-boost drives away from me.


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

I'm going to buy two f150s tomorrow, or in two weeks. I may be grabbing a snow thrower instead, since it won't take much time and I'd like to spend time with the family this weekend (I hate buying cars and the time involved). I just have to make sure they'll honour the 0% financing and I'll grab the trucks later.

I'll get the lariat with the bigger engine and ecoboost for cruising and a supercrew with an 8' bed for work. If I can get everything the lariat has without paying for the name, I'll go that route. I made the mistake of paying for the limited when they came out, and I regret it. The platinums are ugly inside, so they're out of the question. 

I buy ford, since they have taken care of my dad and it feels right. My whole family drives them (except for my pain-in-the-ass wife - but her next car will probably be the explorer).

I've driven ford trucks for over a decade and love them.

My father has the latest king ranch - holy shit. The tech has come a long way in a short time.

Soon, one of my father's companies (with the help of ford and magna) will be coming out with some techno-insanity. Hang tight - these trucks will be a whole different ride in a few years.



So...I'd buy a Ford.


----------



## cboutilier (Jan 12, 2016)

adcandour said:


> I'm going to buy two f150s tomorrow, or in two weeks. I may be grabbing a snow thrower instead, since it won't take much time and I'd like to spend time with the family this weekend (I hate buying cars and the time involved). I just have to make sure they'll honour the 0% financing and I'll grab the trucks later.
> 
> I'll get the lariat with the bigger engine and ecoboost for cruising and a supercrew with an 8' bed for work. If I can get everything the lariat has without paying for the name, I'll go that route. I made the mistake of paying for the limited when they came out, and I regret it. The platinums are ugly inside, so they're out of the question.
> 
> ...


My ex's father had a 2011 King Ranch. What a comfortable truck


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

cboutilier said:


> My ex's father had a 2011 King Ranch. What a comfortable truck


They used to be like driving on a sofa. They've changed them the last little while, because the leather was too supple and would tear. 

Here's my dad's when he brought it over for the time. Stunning.


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

Ford, Dodge, GMC/Chevy. Tweedle-Dum, Tweedle-Dee, Tweedle-Doh.


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

Colin brought up a valuable point. Turbos die, often. Ecoboosts have two and I'm sure Colin can attest to the cost not being cheap. Real world driving has shown that they aren't achieving the expected efficiency. Fuel economy in naturally aspirated engines has taken a leap in the past few years. If it was me, I'd steer clear of the turbo's. The all aluminum F150 frame and body also says easy dents, damage and expensive to repair 

GM and Fords 2 trucks are both new, but Dodge is the next to bring theirs out and I'll bet its going to be a humdinger. As ugly (to me) as the Nissans are, they are supposed to be really nice inside


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

People who buy trucks need to throw the idea of less gas out the window. How light it is doesn't mean shit when it's full of plaster and concrete.

They cost $150 to fill on a good day. You'll all have to get over that...


----------



## cboutilier (Jan 12, 2016)

adcandour said:


> People who buy trucks need to throw the idea of less gas out the window. How light it is doesn't mean shit when it's full of plaster and concrete.
> 
> They cost $150 to fill on a good day. You'll all have to get over that...


Thats true, but a 2011 Ecoboost should have better mileage than a 1981 GMC K2500 5.7L but that isn't the case.


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

adcandour said:


> People who buy trucks need to throw the idea of less gas out the window. How light it is doesn't mean shit when it's full of plaster and concrete.
> 
> They cost $150 to fill on a good day. You'll all have to get over that...


True, when you are a contractor, it means little. But not everyone uses them for work. Trucks are the new minivan


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

cboutilier said:


> Thats true, but a 2011 Ecoboost should have better mileage than a 1981 GMC K2500 5.7L but that isn't the case.


THAT bad?? Wow...loved the C/K trucks, but they wee terrible on fuel....3 speed transmissions didn't help


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

cboutilier said:


> Thats true, but a 2011 Ecoboost should have better mileage than a 1981 GMC K2500 5.7L but that isn't the case.


I agree. I just never expect a vehicle as big as my truck to be fuel efficient. My ecoboost is no better than my v8 triton. Energy is energy and you need a certain amount to move a certain amount of weight. I expect a little decrease in fuel cost over the year, but nothing noticeable day to day.

When I treat the truck well, I get 12.8L/100km. when I don't, it's 13.6L


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

Scotty said:


> True, when you are a contractor, it means little. But not everyone uses them for work. Trucks are the new minivan


I buy them for two different reasons - one is for actual work (constant hauling debris, etc), and the other is to impress clients (my daily driver). I have to look good to get the work I'm after.

The funny thing is that I don't want to drive trucks. I hate it, haha. I just want something low and fast for a change.


----------



## cboutilier (Jan 12, 2016)

adcandour said:


> I agree. I just never expect a vehicle as big as my truck to be fuel efficient. My ecoboost is no better than my v8 triton. Energy is energy and you need a certain amount to move a certain amount of weight. I expect a little decrease in fuel cost over the year, but nothing noticeable day to day.
> 
> When I treat the truck well, I get 12.8L/100km. when I don't, it's 13.6L


I was over 20L/100 with the Eco hauling a 3-4 ton trailer.


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

cboutilier said:


> I was over 20L/100 with the Eco hauling a 3-4 ton trailer.


Ouch.


----------



## Electraglide (Jan 24, 2010)

Small block, 4 or 5 spd, no power windows, door locks or anything like that. And with a key for the ignition. AM/FM radio. Single seat with a full sized 8' box. 2wd. 15" or 16" tires would be nice. Just a plain jane truck.....base model, any brand.


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

Electraglide said:


> Small block, 4 or 5 spd, no power windows, door locks or anything like that. And with a key for the ignition. AM/FM radio. Single seat with a full sized 8' box. 2wd. 15" or 16" tires would be nice. Just a plain jane truck.....base model, any brand.


I used to think that way...until I started driving trucks with options. Now I want a quiet truck with _some_ comforts. Good seats, basic power group, decent stereo with USB, A/C and full back seat (Because tonneau covers are annoying, caps make it no different than a van, but one you cant step into...and guitars and amps don't like rain and snow). Quad cabs are great in parking lot situs, but the older style half doors are better for trying to fit large items in the rear seat as it opens the entire cab without a post. Gotta have at least a 6.5' box too. 5's are useless


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

Electraglide said:


> Small block, 4 or 5 spd, no power windows, door locks or anything like that. And with a key for the ignition. AM/FM radio. Single seat with a full sized 8' box. 2wd. 15" or 16" tires would be nice. Just a plain jane truck.....base model, any brand.


Those new fangled things?

Get me a cart and a coupla sturdy horses and girl to belt me some sing-songs.

you old fart.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

vadsy said:


> What truck would you pick?


the red one, is the only possible correct answer


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

adcandour said:


> Those new fangled things?
> 
> Get me a cart and a coupla sturdy horses and girl to belt me some sing-songs.
> 
> you old fart.


A cart an a coupla sturdy horses? Luggggggzzzury.

Of course, we had it toooffff. Our grandaddy would harness us kids up, make us pull his rocking chair all the way to town and back again, up hill through gales and snow and against the wind. But you tell the kids that today? And they don't believe you.


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

What about the Tacoma? looks like it's a freshened up design? Sort of like the new 3/4 size canyon or Colorado but good interior size and respectable utility capacity


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

I have had a F150 with the 4.6L in it for about 9 years. Been a very reliable truck. If the V8 option is a 5.0L presently I would be getting that.


----------



## cboutilier (Jan 12, 2016)

My general rule for Ford is anything is better than a 5.4


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

cboutilier said:


> My general rule for Ford is anything is better than a 5.4


Agreed, but the 4.6L was also a dog. Step on the gas and all it does is complain and suck fuel. I was so glad to be rid of the truck I was in.
The new 5.0L is impressive though. Very impressive. No need to spin up turbos to get on the powerband. Turbos on gas motors are not required for power, are expensive to buy and _then REPLACE. _If you're leasing, it really doesn't matter I guess. It will be someone else's problem a few years later. The hi-po Eco would be a lot of fun, but hard on the drivers license (mine anyway)


----------



## cboutilier (Jan 12, 2016)

Scotty said:


> Agreed, but the 4.6L was also a dog. Step on the gas and all it does is complain and suck fuel. I was so glad to be rid of the truck I was in.
> The new 5.0L is impressive though. Very impressive. No need to spin up turbos to get on the powerband. Turbos on gas motors are not required for power, are expensive to buy and _then REPLACE. _If you're leasing, it really doesn't matter I guess. It will be someone else's problem a few years later. The hi-po Eco would be a lot of fun, but hard on the drivers license (mine anyway)


They are fun. I'm a big fan of turbo gas engines (I'm a 4cyl rice rocket guy). 

The 5.4 engines were just hand grenades waiting to go off. Dad's shop replaced 4/10 engines in the batch they bought once.

Buddy of mine just picked up a 2500HD Chev with a 8.1L big block. 496ci. What a monster, and surprisingly not terrible on fuel. It gets better mileage than Dad's 4.2L v6 ford f150.


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

cboutilier said:


> They are fun. I'm a big fan of turbo gas engines (I'm a 4cyl rice rocket guy).
> 
> The 5.4 engines were just hand grenades waiting to go off. Dad's shop replaced 4/10 engines in the batch they bought once.
> 
> Buddy of mine just picked up a 2500HD Chev with a 8.1L big block. 496ci. What a monster, and surprisingly not terrible on fuel. It gets better mileage than Dad's 4.2L v6 ford f150.


Perhaps I should have said that you dont need turbos to develop power on gas engines like you do on a diesel, unless it is a small displacement gas engine. I agree that turbos have their place. 
I'm a firm beleiver that an engine with a combination of low end torque and a crossover of horsepower for the upper end when combined with the right drivetrain can be very fuel efficient. I think power equates to economy when you don't have to step hard on it to get it moving. The advancements of recent transmission technology sure has made a big difference too.


----------



## cboutilier (Jan 12, 2016)

Scotty said:


> Perhaps I should have said that you dont need turbos to develop power on gas engines like you do on a diesel, unless it is a small displacement gas engine. I agree that turbos have their place.
> I'm a firm beleiver that an engine with a combination of low end torque and a crossover of horsepower for the upper end when combined with the right drivetrain can be very fuel efficient. I think power equates to economy when you don't have to step hard on it to get it moving. The advancements of recent transmission technology sure has made a big difference too.


For sure. I used to drive my 4.3L Chev C1500 side by side with Dad's 5.7L. His was way better on fuel because it wasn't working as hard. The 4.3 is the exact same engine as a 5.7L, but with the last two cylinders chopped off.


----------



## Lincoln (Jun 2, 2008)

cboutilier said:


> My general rule for Ford is anything is better than a 5.4


Actually you can't label all 5.4's as bad news. They had some bad years alright, about 2003 to 2008, (early 3 valve engines) but before that & after that they are ok. The 6.8 V10's are the ones to be avoided.

What I really like on the 5.0 over the 5.4 (aside from better mileage) is apparent when you open the hood. You can clearly see a 5.0 and all the parts. A 5.4 is buried deep in crap. The 5.4 is old technology struggling to keep up, while the 5.0 is new technology built with meeting future requirements in mind. Whether you do your own maintenance or pay someone to do it, the 5.0 is easier to work on and that means cheaper to fix.


----------



## Electraglide (Jan 24, 2010)

adcandour said:


> Those new fangled things?
> 
> Get me a cart and a coupla sturdy horses and girl to belt me some sing-songs.
> 
> you old fart.


3 on the tree would even be better. With this under the hood.


----------



## Lincoln (Jun 2, 2008)

As pretty as that flathead Ford is, it would never pass an emissions test.

You know what's sad? All my life I dreamed of going to California just to stand on a street corner and watch all the awesome cars roll by. I never made it there. And now? California is all about electric cars & hybrids. Something there went horribly wrong.


----------



## Electraglide (Jan 24, 2010)

Lincoln said:


> As pretty as that flathead Ford is, it would never pass an emissions test.
> 
> You know what's sad? All my life I dreamed of going to California just to stand on a street corner and watch all the awesome cars roll by. I never made it there. And now? California is all about electric cars & hybrids. Something there went horribly wrong.


No emission testing here.


----------



## Wardo (Feb 5, 2010)

25 years of driving Ford trucks they've been the best vehicles I've ever owned.

Bought a new 2010 XLT SCAB with 4.6 three valve. Cost me 20 grand new off the lot with all the rebates and clunker cash for my old truck plus Costco gave me a grand for buying Ford. This has been my daily driver since then. The 3 valve is close to 300HP so it's an adequate light duty motor and has been fine. Only issue in 6 years was the bulkhead connector went out on the transmission but there was a TSB on that so fixed no problem. XLT is a decent enough trim level unless you want a Cowboy Cadillac.

I'm not liking the electric steering on the newer trucks; my 2010 has better feel. But it is what it is.

As for fuel, it's a truck it's gonna use gas so I don't worry about it.

I'd get the 5 liter unless you need low end for tow; I think the 5 liter doesn't make much in the power band until it's well up into the rpm range.

Haven't kept track of it that much but my understanding is that real world mileage from the boosted motor (3.5 ?) isn't that great. Plus the V8 has a nice sound when you get on it.

Aluminum body on new 150s = expensive to fix.

Six speed tranny has been good on mine - I'd rather not have any more gears than 6 because just something else to go wrong for very little MPG gain.


----------



## cboutilier (Jan 12, 2016)

Wardo said:


> 25 years of driving Ford trucks they've been the best vehicles I've ever owned.
> 
> Bought a new 2010 XLT SCAB with 4.6 three valve. Cost me 20 grand new off the lot with all the rebates and clunker cash for my old truck plus Costco gave me a grand for buying Ford. This has been my daily driver since then. The 3 valve is close to 300HP so it's an adequate light duty motor and has been fine. Only issue in 6 years was the bulkhead connector went out on the transmission but there was a TSB on that so fixed no problem. XLT is a decent enough trim level unless you want a Cowboy Cadillac.
> 
> ...


I heard the 8 speed Dodges cant ever figure out what gear they want to be in. They are always shifting.

I don't know if I'll ever own a brand new truck. I'm far to partial to the third pedal. I believe the only option these days for a standard pickup is the Cummins Dodge.


----------



## BSTheTech (Sep 30, 2015)

With 1/2 ton trucks (F150, 1500's etc) you really need to read the GVW tag. A driver/passenger and a bag of cement pretty much maxes them out. These fools towing large trailers are an accident waiting to happen. Take a good look at your needs and consider a F250. The 150's are basically open station wagons.


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

Went in today. Was told that the 2.7 liter eco boost is for me, so I'll get that as a lariat. The other for work will have the 5 liter base model with the 9' bed. I'll need caps for both. Both will be 2016s 

I have to figure out the cost benefits of leasing and buying out versus buying at 0% financing. I hate this crap.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

cboutilier said:


> For sure. I used to drive my 4.3L Chev C1500 side by side with Dad's 5.7L. His was way better on fuel because it wasn't working as hard. The 4.3 is the exact same engine as a 5.7L, but with the last two cylinders chopped off.


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

adcandour said:


> Went in today. Was told that the 2.7 liter eco boost is for me, so I'll get that as a lariat. The other for work will have the 5 liter base model with the 9' bed. I'll need caps for both. Both will be 2016s
> 
> I have to figure out the cost benefits of leasing and buying out versus buying at 0% financing. I hate this crap.


Sounds like they are for business, which means they will be 100% write off if a lease. With purchase, you can only write off depreciation value(??) I THINK - worth looking into


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

BSTheTech said:


> With 1/2 ton trucks (F150, 1500's etc) you really need to read the GVW tag. A driver/passenger and a bag of cement pretty much maxes them out. These fools towing large trailers are an accident waiting to happen. Take a good look at your needs and consider a F250. The 150's are basically open station wagons.


They key is LARGE trailer. 1500 series trucks can still tow a respectable weight. And you are right, that towing capacities only include curb (dty) weight and the weight of a driver. Passengers and cargo are detracted from that capacity. People towing large trailers, such as box utilities and RV's often push their luck as they may be at or under their GVWR, but they aren't taking wind loads into that. May as well be towing a brick down the highway. I always like to be at 25-30% reserve capacity from the GVW. Those guys pulling goosenecks or long box or RV trailers _SHOULD _be in 2500-3500 series trucks


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

Scotty said:


> Sounds like they are for business, which means they will be 100% write off if a lease. With purchase, you can only write off depreciation value(??) I THINK - worth looking into


Yeah, they have a couple of interesting ways to iron out the numbers. I pay out of my company, so, as with anything, it'll come down to the bottom dollar.


----------



## Jim DaddyO (Mar 20, 2009)

A blazing 40 hp beast. But you could fix anything with a pair of vice grips and a hammer. Good enough for John Walton to deliver lumber.


----------



## cboutilier (Jan 12, 2016)

BSTheTech said:


> With 1/2 ton trucks (F150, 1500's etc) you really need to read the GVW tag. A driver/passenger and a bag of cement pretty much maxes them out. These fools towing large trailers are an accident waiting to happen. Take a good look at your needs and consider a F250. The 150's are basically open station wagons.


Oh I agree. I keep telling management and the owners they are waiting for a claim.


----------



## keithb7 (Dec 28, 2006)

For real life fuel economy results, I recommend Browse All Cars | Fuelly
Real people driving various conditions, uploading their mileage. The crap on the dealer paperwork and advertising is laughable.
Want to know what a 2010 Ford gets 5 years later, for example? It's all there.

I have a gas pig truck that serves it purpose very well. Trips to the dump. Lumber supply store. Towing. Camping. Otherwise it sits. 
We are fortunate to not have to use it for a daily driver. My wife bought a new 2016 Honda Civic 1.5L turbo. Awesome real life fuel economy.
Under 5.0L per 100 km on the hi-way. 6.8L/100 or so in town. It really does depend how you drive it. My wife beats me on fuel economy consistently.
I don't think she has ever spooled up the turbo. LOL.


----------



## Electraglide (Jan 24, 2010)

Jim DaddyO said:


> A blazing 40 hp beast. But you could fix anything with a pair of vice grips and a hammer. Good enough for John Walton to deliver lumber.


That's the truck for me. Basic and would pull a fair load. 








This will pull at least a 20' stakeside trailer loaded with bales of Alfalfa or a few cords of wood. Or a 25' Airstream. You had to have a screwdriver with the hammer and the vise-grips to fix this. Never worried about gvwr or things like that.


----------



## bzrkrage (Mar 20, 2011)

Holden SSV Commodore Ute.
2016 Holden VFII Ute - It's the Ultimate Sports Machine


Sent from my other other brain.


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

Electraglide said:


> That's the truck for me. Basic and would pull a fair load.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sharp truck, but check to be sure your insurance policy will cover towing. I've heard that classic car policies don't, or perhaps some dont


----------



## Wardo (Feb 5, 2010)

bzrkrage said:


> Holden SSV Commodore Ute.
> 2016 Holden VFII Ute - It's the Ultimate Sports Machine
> 
> Sent from my other other brain.


That's about the only car type vehicle I've seen in a good few years that I actually like. Too close to the ground though.


----------



## Electraglide (Jan 24, 2010)

Scotty said:


> Sharp truck, but check to be sure your insurance policy will cover towing. I've heard that classic car policies don't, or perhaps some dont


Why insure it as a classic vehicle? Unless it's going to sit and be driven on a Sunday or something like that, it's a truck, driven as an everyday vehicle and insured as such. This one's a little fancy but a few scrapes and a bit of mud will take care of that.


----------



## Electraglide (Jan 24, 2010)

bzrkrage said:


> Holden SSV Commodore Ute.
> 2016 Holden VFII Ute - It's the Ultimate Sports Machine
> 
> 
> Sent from my other other brain.


That would bottom out going to my brothers place.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

Ford sells more trucks than GM because they are cheaper. If you want a truck that will last, go GM. If you can't afford a GM or don't really need a truck that will do some serious work or not worried about the aluminum box, then Ford might be your best bet. Also, the Ecoboost is good but when you are towing and those tubos kick in the gas mileage goes out the window plus you have the extra maintenance if the turbo goes and they do.

My nephew who owns a body shop has told me some horror stories about the Fords' new aluminum bodies. If you want to know the whole scoop you can PM me.


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

Steadfastly said:


> Ford sells more trucks than GM because they are cheaper. If you want a truck that will last, go GM. If you can't afford a GM or don't really need a truck that will do some serious work or not worried about the aluminum box, then Ford might be your best bet. Also, the Ecoboost is good but when you are towing and those tubos kick in the gas mileage goes out the window plus you have the extra maintenance if the turbo goes and they do.
> 
> My nephew who owns a body shop has told me some horror stories about the Fords' new aluminum bodies. If you want to know the whole scoop you can PM me.


Steadly, you're talking out your ass. A truck that will last, go with a GM? Firstly, they can _all_ last. But, even my uncle who worked the line wouldn't buy one. Maybe cuz besides being ugly as hell their airbags kill people? Not sure.

And, there's a lot more to the ecoboost than just fuel economy. ex. the 3.5 engine was meant to outperform the 6.3L engine - which it does. It has to be a pig, but it's not as big a pig. And repairs costs on turbos always add repair costs - no matter what the vehicle. 

The first 2 years of the ecoboost engines had the potential to create a timing issue eventually. As with all tech, they needed to hone things - and they have. My engine never had the problem, mind you.

further, the base price for the 2017 GMC Sierra 1500 is $30,520, while the F150s is $31,870. That was a quick check on the net (not sure where you saw this, the paper?)

AND, the Denali 1500 comes in at $65K while the Limited F150 is $87K. I owned the limited, and my brother-in-law the Denali - do I have to tell you it was no contest in the luxury and tech department?

Either way, the numbers for the base are around the same, so people are buying them, cause they're BETTER.


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

adcandour said:


> Steadly, you're talking out your ass.


@Steadfastly, you should make this your signature ^^^


----------



## Lincoln (Jun 2, 2008)

Steadfastly said:


> Ford sells more trucks than GM because they are cheaper. If you want a truck that will last, go GM. If you can't afford a GM or don't really need a truck that will do some serious work or not worried about the aluminum box, then Ford might be your best bet. Also, the Ecoboost is good but when you are towing and those tubos kick in the gas mileage goes out the window plus you have the extra maintenance if the turbo goes and they do.
> 
> My nephew who owns a body shop has told me some horror stories about the Fords' new aluminum bodies. If you want to know the whole scoop you can PM me.


not wanting to start anything here, but the only reason a GM truck would last longer is because no one will drive it. You give work crews a choice of the big 3 trucks, all in a lineup, first come/first served and the Fords will always go out first, then the Dodges, and last choice - last truck to leave is always the GM.

I haven't seen a turbo go on an ecoboost yet. Spark plugs? Yes, they eat spark plugs at about 50K, but no turbo troubles.


----------



## cboutilier (Jan 12, 2016)

Lincoln said:


> not wanting to start anything here, but the only reason a GM truck would last longer is because no one will drive it. You give work crews a choice of the big 3 trucks, all in a lineup, first come/first served and the Fords will always go out first, then the Dodges, and last choice - last truck to leave is always the GM.
> 
> I haven't seen a turbo go on an ecoboost yet. Spark plugs? Yes, they eat spark plugs at about 50K, but no turbo troubles.


I went through two on the 2011 FX4. First one at around 170k and the second at about 220k. Mostly all highway commuting miles. Didn't start using it as a work truck until after the first turbo went. Its since been traded in for a 2016 5.0L. 

I wouldn't rule out a newer gen Ecoboost if it were me buying a Ford though. I love turbo gas engines, but I think Ford could've done better. 

The only person in my company that would pick a Ford overy a Chev is the owner. Therefore we drive Ford's.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

Lincoln said:


> not wanting to start anything here, but the only reason a GM truck would last longer is because no one will drive it. You give work crews a choice of the big 3 trucks, all in a lineup, first come/first served and the Fords will always go out first, then the Dodges, and last choice - last truck to leave is always the GM.
> 
> *I haven't seen a turbo go on an ecoboost yet. * Spark plugs? Yes, they eat spark plugs at about 50K, but no turbo troubles.


Someone earlier on this thread had theirs go. Where I live we are in the country and there are a lot of trucks. The work trucks are mostly GM. When you push an engine with a turbo, you are increasing compression and heat. Heat is what kills an engine quicker than anything. If that really worked, all companies would be building smaller engines and putting turbos in them.

The local DOT bought some Fords and put a rack on the boxes and the aluminum boxed rippled all the way down the side.

The local CAT company bought a fleet of them a few years ago and had so many problems with them the employees didn't want to drive them. They ended up taking a loss and brought the GM's back.

I am not trying to start anything either, These are the facts. If someone wants to buy a Ford, then by all means go ahead. These are some of the problems you may run into.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

adcandour said:


> Steadly, you're talking out your ass. A truck that will last, go with a GM? Firstly, they can _all_ last. But, even my uncle who worked the line wouldn't buy one. Maybe cuz besides being ugly as hell their airbags kill people? Not sure.
> 
> And, there's a lot more to the ecoboost than just fuel economy. ex. the 3.5 engine was meant to outperform the 6.3L engine - which it does. It has to be a pig, but it's not as big a pig. And repairs costs on turbos always add repair costs - no matter what the vehicle.
> 
> ...


I don't know where you got your numbers but I just priced and built both a Ford and a GM with similar specs (except the engine, of course) and the GM was around $7000.00 more. I am not talking top of the line type Denali vehicles. I would never spend that much on a vehicle so am not interested. We have very few of those types of vehicles around here. We live in a lumber district where trucks get used and abused, so not many people are going to spend that kind of money to see the truck get beat up.


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

Steadfastly said:


> I don't know where you got your numbers but I just priced and built both a Ford and a GM with similar specs (except the engine, of course) and the GM was around $7000.00 more. I am not talking top of the line type Denali vehicles. I would never spend that much on a vehicle so am not interested. We have very few of those types of vehicles around here. We live in a lumber district where trucks get used and abused, so not many people are going to spend that kind of money to see the truck get beat up.


$29,400 - there base model compared to Ford's base model at $25,700. A difference of $3700. I doubt that people who buy a Ford can't afford the difference. You made it sound like Ford's are for people with low incomes. 

Keep in mind that this is also just another quick search. I went to the websites. Previously I just looked up the MSRPs which were closer.


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

I know one thing, and that is I would never buy an aluminum truck for a service/contractor vehicle. Way too soft. I'd want a steel bed liner to go with it


----------



## Lincoln (Jun 2, 2008)

Steadfastly said:


> Someone earlier on this thread had theirs go. Where I live we are in the country and there are a lot of trucks. The work trucks are mostly GM. When you push an engine with a turbo, you are increasing compression and heat. Heat is what kills an engine quicker than anything. If that really worked, all companies would be building smaller engines and putting turbos in them.


heat doesn't kill engines. Lack of proper maintenance kills engines and turbos. Heat is good for them, it's overheat after the loss of coolant that kills.



Steadfastly said:


> The local DOT bought some Fords and put a rack on the boxes and the aluminum boxed rippled all the way down the side.


That's nothing new. Any one stupid enough to mount a rack on just the side rails will end up with a ripped box in short order. Steel boxes too. You have to tie them together on the front rail for support.



Steadfastly said:


> The local CAT company bought a fleet of them a few years ago and had so many problems with them the employees didn't want to drive them. They ended up taking a loss and brought the GM's back.
> 
> I am not trying to start anything either, These are the facts. If someone wants to buy a Ford, then by all means go ahead. These are some of the problems you may run into.


Lots of pickup trucks in Alberta too. 

Alberta the heart of the country’s truck belt

If you need a truck, you buy a Ford. If you can't afford a Ford, you buy a Dodge. I don't why anyone would buy a Chevy. Maybe it's the colder Alberta winters that is hard on GM's plastic construction & plastic clips holding everything together, but they don't cut it.


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

Scotty said:


> I know one thing, and that is I would never buy an aluminum truck for a service/contractor vehicle. Way too soft. I'd want a steel bed liner to go with it


My father went mining for silver and loaded his truck up with it. Trust me, there's no issues there.


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

Steadfastly said:


> Ford sells more trucks than GM because they are cheaper. If you want a truck that will last, go GM. If you can't afford a GM or don't really need a truck that will do some serious work or not worried about the aluminum box, then Ford might be your best bet. Also, the Ecoboost is good but when you are towing and those tubos kick in the gas mileage goes out the window plus you have the extra maintenance if the turbo goes and they do.
> 
> My nephew who owns a body shop has told me some horror stories about the Fords' new aluminum bodies. If you want to know the whole scoop you can PM me.


Something else to consider...

My father (in his boring retirement) gets hired as a consultant to go and tell all the major auto companies how to change things to save money. He's saved some BILLIONS. No joke or exaggeration - I can get the numbers and timeline if anyone cares. 

Just last week he was in London collecting data for GM, so that they could make sure they weren't overpaying for a contract they already agreed to (I believe with magna). It has to do with the chassis or something. Kinda stupid, isn't it?

Flat out, he'll tell you ford is the best (and not just cause he has lunch with the CEO of Ford (one of them) or golfs with the head of purchasing. Shit, the head of quality control was at my wedding). Anyway, he's re-engineered so much crap for all of them that I'll take his word over pretty much anyone's (he was head engineer for over two decades at a tier one supplier before becoming general manager). He has very intimate knowledge of the workings of essentially every facet of the industry - and has also worked with Daimler-Chrysler, Chevy, etc.

Right now, his company (one of) with the backing of Ford, Magna, and another company that builds prototypes, are about to create something so mental, it'll definitely be a thread here in the future. I believe they have a meeting with Boeing this week.

So, my point is FORD is the shit.


----------



## cboutilier (Jan 12, 2016)

The aluminum box is the one thing that excites me most about the Fords. Lighter weight, rust free... I'd rather replace 6 engines over the years than do bodywork once. Only downside I see is that I don't have any aluminum welding gear at home, yet.


----------



## Electraglide (Jan 24, 2010)

Lincoln said:


> heat doesn't kill engines. Lack of proper maintenance kills engines and turbos. Heat is good for them, it's overheat after the loss of coolant that kills.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There's a song in here somewhere.


----------



## TA462 (Oct 30, 2012)

cboutilier said:


> The aluminum box is the one thing that excites me most about the Fords. Lighter weight, rust free... I'd rather replace 6 engines over the years than do bodywork once. Only downside I see is that I don't have any aluminum welding gear at home, yet.


Most body shops don't have the proper equipment to repair aluminum either. Welding aluminum vs steel is different, I've done both. My neighbour got into a very minor accident with her new F150. This minor accident turned out to be 15000 dollars in repairs because of the aluminum body. The truck had to be taken to a shop 200 kms away to be repaired because nobody local could or wanted to work on it. We were looking at the truck after it was fixed and you can actually push in on all the body panels. They flex in and out. She uses the truck as a truck and out of curiosity we lifted up the box liner and the dents on the floor looked like a truck that was 20 years old. I love the looks of the new Ford trucks but I highly doubt they are going to last long if you work them like a truck. They are ok for basic transportation but if you want to tow with it or use it like a truck then stay away from the F150. Like adcandour said, they are shit.


----------



## cboutilier (Jan 12, 2016)

TA462 said:


> Most body shops don't have the proper equipment to repair aluminum either. Welding aluminum vs steel is different, I've done both. My neighbour got into a very minor accident with her new F150. This minor accident turned out to be 15000 dollars in repairs because of the aluminum body. The truck had to be taken to a shop 200 kms away to be repaired because nobody local could or wanted to work on it. We were looking at the truck after it was fixed and you can actually push in on all the body panels. They flex in and out. She uses the truck as a truck and out of curiosity we lifted up the box liner and the dents on the floor looked like a truck that was 20 years old. I love the looks of the new Ford trucks but I highly doubt they are going to last long if you work them like a truck. They are ok for basic transportation but if you want to tow with it or use it like a truck then stay away from the F150. Like adcandour said, they are shit.


I hope they work the kinks out of the aluminum issues with the next generation. Or maybe Chev will come along and get it right


----------



## TA462 (Oct 30, 2012)

cboutilier said:


> I hope they work the kinks out of the aluminum issues with the next generation. Or maybe Chev will come along and get it right


Ford should have just designed their truck to be lighter using steel instead of using aluminum. There is a reason why GM, Dodge, Toyota and Honda haven't used aluminum in their trucks. It makes for a poor quality product that doesn't stand up to the demands it is suppose to with stand. Jaguar and Audi have aluminum body cars but they don't take the punishment trucks take. If it was a good idea Honda and Toyota would have done it years ago. People who want a truck to work want a gas V8 with lots of torque or a Turbo Diesel, not a Eco Boost POS that should be in a car not a truck. In five years time I bet Ford switches back to steel bodies. No disrespect to adcandour or his dad but the new F150 is truly a POS. For basic transportation it is ok but as a truck it fails the grade in every category you could put it in except for one, its light weight. Funny, before the body change the F150 was the heaviest truck you could buy.


----------



## Lincoln (Jun 2, 2008)

Ok, so if I ever buy a new Ford truck made out of aluminum, I'll be sure and put a wooden box liner in it rather than a spray-in liner. Thanks for the tip guys!  Just makes sense, really.


----------



## Jim DaddyO (Mar 20, 2009)

Yeah, but the Ford is "Military Grade Aluminium" what ever that is. Despite working over 35 years with metals, I have heard of a lot of grades of aluminium but none of them were labelled "Military".


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

Do disrespect taken (by me - my father had a bout of calling us all "yo-yos"). There's simply too many uninformed statements in your post though.

Like Lincoln says - it's all in the liner.

If you don't live close to a dealership, then I guess that's a problem. To quote pops, "yeah, 'cause they live on a farm".

I was just informed that the technology wasn't there for honda or GM to do it. Ford legitimately beat them to it.

Towing off a steel frame is the same as towing off a steel frame, so there won't be an issue there.

My father will take the bet on them going back to steel. He also mentioned that it's impossible to work steel to be as light as aluminum. As an engineer, that one got to him, haha.

I mean, my father has had his for over a year now. He collects rocks and fills the bed. He's a chair on some uber-cheesy rockhound club in Ohio and they all make a trip to Canada twice a year and fill their beds with jagged boulders and stone. He flips homes as another one of his hobbies and does all the tiling, hardwood, plumbing, etc himself (everything but drywall) and his truck is still in fantastic shape.

I will have mine soon enough - and the one will take an absolute shit-kicking with it's primary purpose to remove demo waste, haul equipment, carry tools. I will keep you posted.


----------



## Jim DaddyO (Mar 20, 2009)




----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

cboutilier said:


> The aluminum box is the one thing that excites me most about the Fords. Lighter weight, rust free... I'd rather replace 6 engines over the years than do bodywork once. Only downside I see is that I don't have any aluminum welding gear at home, yet.


And be prepared to spend big. Most migs can be equipped with spoolguns for aluminum, but if you want to do precision aluminum welding or weld thin sections (body panels), be prepared to buy an AC/DC TIG welder, preferably with a pulser.


----------



## cboutilier (Jan 12, 2016)

adcandour said:


> Do disrespect taken (by me - my father had a bout of calling us all "yo-yos"). There's simply too many uninformed statements in your post though.
> 
> Like Lincoln says - it's all in the liner.
> 
> ...


I try to look at things from an engineer's point of view as well. If Chev offered an aluminium box, I would opt for it for sure. 

If I could build my own truck it would be a Chev, with an aluminum box, a Cummins engine, and an Eaton-Fuller 6 speed manual.


----------



## cboutilier (Jan 12, 2016)

Scotty said:


> And be prepared to spend big. Most migs can be equipped with spoolguns for aluminum, but if you want to do precision aluminum welding or weld thin sections (body panels), be prepared to buy an AC/DC TIG welder, preferably with a pulser.


How thin are the body panels? I could probably weld them with a spool gun but it would be a pain in the ass. I do need a good excuse to buy a TIG though...


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

adcandour said:


> - it's all in the liner.
> 
> I was just informed that the technology wasn't there for honda or GM to do it. Ford legitimately beat them to it.
> 
> ...


I don't see towing off an aluminum frame being an issue unless its a pintle hitch where there is constant impact. I agree about not being able to make steel frames thinner. They would have to be 2/3 thinner, which would reduce them to sheetmetal frames...and subject to corrosion and stress failures. 
The boxes of the new F150 might be substantially thick aluminum, but I doubt the body panels will be. I'll be interested to see how they stand up to daily rigors, AKA "work truck" mentality where workers don't care.


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

cboutilier said:


> How thin are the body panels? I could probably weld them with a spool gun but it would be a pain in the ass. I do need a good excuse to buy a TIG though...


I'd bet that a spool gun will do nothing but blow holes in the body panel. They hammer the wire out hard on the start and you cant turn MIGs down that cold. You might be able to tack with a backer plate behind it... edit, after seeing how thin the body panels are in that video attached to this thread, you'd have to be exceptionally good with a TIGwelder


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

Lincoln said:


> Ok, so if I ever buy a new Ford truck made out of aluminum, I'll be sure and put a wooden box liner in it rather than a spray-in liner. Thanks for the tip guys!  Just makes sense, really.


That won't work either because, structurally the box is not strong enough. It dents very easily. Branches hitting it will leave a mark you could buff out in steel but not with the aluminum. I could see using it in some car body parts but not a truck.


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

Steadfastly said:


> That won't work either because, structurally the box is not strong enough. It dents very easily. Branches hitting it will leave a mark you could buff out in steel but not with the aluminum. I could see using it in some car body parts but not a truck.


This statement seems like more ass talking.


----------



## Lincoln (Jun 2, 2008)

vadsy said:


> This statement seems like more ass talking.


I was wondering if you were going to stop by and see what you've created here


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

Lincoln said:


> I was wondering if you were going to stop by and see what you've created here


I've been keeping an eye on it for sure. The thing is I'm not here to argue trucks I'm just here to get some peoples thoughts and hopefully experiences, the inside info outside of a sales pitch is always welcome as long as it isn't just bullshit. You're always going to have people who come in with a raging hate on or people who ramble about useless things that haven't been a factor in the last 30 years but whatever, posting a thread along these lines comes with risks. This is basically a Gibson vs. Fender thread but with trucks.

I've been out for a few test drives at this point and I've figured out exactly what I want, saved a few window stickers and now just looking on who can get me the best price.
For those who posted here in all seriousness with the intention of helping me out,.. thank you.


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

vadsy said:


> I've been keeping an eye on it for sure. The thing is I'm not here to argue trucks I'm just here to get some peoples thoughts and hopefully experiences, the inside info outside of a sales pitch is always welcome as long as it isn't just bullshit. You're always going to have people who come in with a raging hate on or people who ramble about useless things that haven't been a factor in the last 30 years but whatever, posting a thread along these lines comes with risks. This is basically a Gibson vs. Fender thread but with trucks.
> 
> I've been out for a few test drives at this point and I've figured out exactly what I want, saved a few window stickers and now just looking on who can get me the best price.
> For those who posted here in all seriousness with the intention of helping me out,.. thank you.


Well you had to know that you were going to get a bit of a shit show. There's no true winner as they all have their benefits and also their share of issues. Does not matter what brand. There's a myriad of opinions, some based on fact, some speculation and some from those who cannot see past certain brands, or perhaps certain styling, country of origin, colour etc.... It is the same old debate that it has been since wheels were invented. Only you can choose which money pit is right for you. Lets face it, vehicles will always be the biggest, continual drain on your wallet. And no, lets not bring "classic cars" into this as they don't make fiscal sense in daily driving in any practical sense


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

Scotty said:


> Well you had to know that you were going to get a bit of a shit show.


Absolutely I did.


----------



## Wardo (Feb 5, 2010)

Yeah, classic cars...lol 

I have an 83 TA that I need to get rid of but have about 20 grand into - ZZ4 crate motor, Koni yellows and a bunch of other stuff be lucky to get 7 out of it and don't drive it at all no more. Seemed like a good idea at the time...lol


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

Steadfastly said:


> That won't work either because, structurally the box is not strong enough. It dents very easily. Branches hitting it will leave a mark you could buff out in steel but not with the aluminum. I could see using it in some car body parts but not a truck.


There's different strengths of aluminium. I'm not sure where you're getting your facts about this.

I also used to build passenger planes - lots of strong ass aluminum there too. I used to rivet on parts of the aileron and attached it as well (to a Q400). They had to handle some serious sheer force.


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

Yeah, I'm probably not the guy to ask, since I'm so pro-ford, but what can I say...

Here's the pricing I ended up being offered. They still haven't accounted for my Costco discount of $2K though.

2016 Lariat Crew 4x4 with leather/Nav/Roof: 84 month finance at 0%: 379.21 biweekly

2016 XLT supercab 4x4 with 8 foot box: 84 month finance at 0%: 271.36 biweekly

I got $17000K in trade-in value (but I told them to bite me, so they're looking at doing better). Also note that they're 2016 models, so that helped.

It also makes more sense for me to own instead of lease.

Im not certain, but if the roof is anything like my father's, the whole thing is glass that opens up to the sky. That'll be fun.


----------



## TA462 (Oct 30, 2012)

adcandour said:


> Do disrespect taken (by me - my father had a bout of calling us all "yo-yos"). There's simply too many uninformed statements in your post though.
> 
> Like Lincoln says - it's all in the liner.
> 
> ...


Uninformed statements? LOL, OK. My neighbours truck had a plastic type box liner. The same type that I've had in every single one of my trucks, a Dodge and 3 GM's. My trucks had a few dings in the box after 5 years but my neighbours 2 month old Ford has around 20. Is that a defect in the liner or the poor designed aluminum floor? 

Having a aluminum body has nothing to do with towing. I mentioned the ECO Boost motor as a poor choice for towing. Get the 5.0 if your going to get one. 

Of course you can't make steel as light as aluminum. You missed my point. If I was the designer and engineer on the F150 I wound have built the box with a steel floor and fenders. It might have added 200 lbs to the weight of the truck. This would have solved Fords problem and trust me it is a huge problem. The aluminum body is a great idea for weight reduction but it just won't stand up no matter what your dad says to you. Think of a steel soup can vs a aluminum beer can. Sure you can crush both but which one is stronger? I won't even mention the door dings your going to get. 

For the record my neighbour and I live about 20 kms from a Ford dealer. They couldn't fix it. 

Its funny your dad saying that the technology wasn't there for Honda and GM to do it. The big three as well as the Foreign automakers have been producing aluminum body parts for decades. Ford sold cars that were imported bodies that were made out of aluminum in 1962, the Shelby Cobra. Shelby built them, Ford sold them. There were cars in the early 1900's that had aluminum bodies. Ford as well as GM and Chrysler back in the 60's had numerous cars that could be had with aluminum front fenders, bumpers, hoods and trunk lids if you checked off the right options. They weren't all that popular but you could buy them. Most of the Super Cars like Ferraris and Lambos built in the 70's and 80's had aluminum body parts as well as aluminum frames. There are a ton of cars built in the 70's and 80's that had aluminum body parts. I don't think you could find a car built today that doesn't have some type of aluminum in it. Aluminum body panels are stamped, just like the steel body panels. There is no special way to produce them so I would tell your dad that he was misinformed, the technology has been around longer then probably he has been alive. 

The Ford F150 has a major design flaw. The floor of the box will dent and with enough force poke a hole in it, no matter what dad tells you.


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

Ok, lets not fight. You can lightheartedly pick on each other but thats it.
I promise not to tow anything and I'll refrain from dropping anything heavy or sharp into the box, soccer balls may be the most I haul.

How about we discuss what I can do to the box and how to best cover it. I'm thinking a plywood liner to start, am I crazy? I like the built in plywood for some reason, mostly won't have anything serious to haul, just smaller and clean stuff. A hard rolling cover perhaps, something like the Truxedo? 

Thoughts?


----------



## bzrkrage (Mar 20, 2011)

Sent from my other brain.


----------



## Lincoln (Jun 2, 2008)

I use Bak-Flip covers and normally spray-ins liners but my liner choice may change. The truck leasing outfits all use plywood liners. People can be careless enough to destroy even steel boxes, I guess they don't take any chances. Nothing wrong with wood box liners. Makes it a lot easier to attach racks and fixtures and hooks & stuff too.


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

Lincoln said:


> I use Bak-Flip covers and normally spray-ins liners but my liner choice may change. The truck leasing outfits all use plywood liners. People can be careless enough to destroy even steel boxes, I guess they don't take any chances. Nothing wrong with wood box liners. Makes it a lot easier to attach racks and fixtures and hooks & stuff too.


Bak-Flip seems similar to the Truxedo, very much what I'm looking for. I'll have to compare to see what works better. 
I've had spray-in and plastic liners but my fav has been the plywood. I also may go with a built-in slide out drawer the width and length of the bed. Found a local place in Edmonton, I'll touch base with them and check on my options. Do you know who else may do this type of work?


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

SVT Raptor.
That is all.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

TA462 said:


> Ford should have just designed their truck to be lighter using steel instead of using aluminum. There is a reason why GM, Dodge, Toyota and Honda haven't used aluminum in their trucks. It makes for a poor quality product that doesn't stand up to the demands it is suppose to with stand. Jaguar and Audi have aluminum body cars but they don't take the punishment trucks take. If it was a good idea Honda and Toyota would have done it years ago. People who want a truck to work want a gas V8 with lots of torque or a Turbo Diesel, not a Eco Boost POS that should be in a car not a truck. In five years time I bet Ford switches back to steel bodies. No disrespect to adcandour or his dad but the new F150 is truly a POS. For basic transportation it is ok but as a truck it fails the grade in every category you could put it in except for one, its light weight. Funny, before the body change the F150 was the heaviest truck you could buy.


I personally think aluminum is here to stay. OEMs will love it. It makes cars even more disposable after accidents, as its hard to repair and its structural integrity is so compromised. More easy write-offs, insurance foots the bill, then passes the costs back on to consumers. That equals more new cars sold. Big business FTW.
if you search for "salvage" or written off MY 2000+ Ferraris and Lambos (ie alum frames) for example, you'll be amazed at how little damage, even just fender benders, is required to write one of these expensive babies off. Time to buy shares in Alcoa.
I don't believe for one second that OEMs care as much about quality as they do sales volume. Quality occurs only when it bisects sales volume on the chart.


----------



## Lincoln (Jun 2, 2008)

vadsy said:


> Do you know who else may do this type of work?


Raven Box Liner in Edmonton was always the big one. I think what you are after is called a "rolling Cargo bed". Google that and see what you come up with.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

adcandour said:


> There's different strengths of aluminium. I'm not sure where you're getting your facts about this.
> 
> I also used to build passenger planes - lots of strong ass aluminum there too. I used to rivet on parts of the aileron and attached it as well (to a Q400). They had to handle some serious sheer force.


My nephew has his own body shop. We live in the country and see this often. These are things that would never be seen in a city and likely why you would not be aware of it.


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

TA462 said:


> Uninformed statements? LOL, OK. My neighbours truck had a plastic type box liner. The same type that I've had in every single one of my trucks, a Dodge and 3 GM's. My trucks had a few dings in the box after 5 years but my neighbours 2 month old Ford has around 20. Is that a defect in the liner or the poor designed aluminum floor? *No, it means I have no idea of the habits of your neighbour.*
> 
> Having a aluminum body has nothing to do with towing. I mentioned the ECO Boost motor as a poor choice for towing. Get the 5.0 if your going to get one. *Sure, but the ecoboosts tests fine for towing. I've been towing equipment with mine. Not often, but there was no issue. To say not to buy a ford, cause it can't tow?*
> 
> ...


 *Yeah, they all have their limits.*



Jim DaddyO said:


>


I remember when I once drove into a pair of pliers...


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

adcandour said:


> I remember when I once drove into a pair of pliers...


So did I, and I documented it for giggles.


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

Here's the article:

What's really behind Chevy's attacks: GM thinks the Ford F-150 is vulnerable

Anyway, we're all gonna buy what we're gonna buy...but until Ford gets knocked from the top...they're kinda the top.


----------



## Lincoln (Jun 2, 2008)

the pliers video is great, but you can do that with any of the new trucks the sheet metal is so thin. We had to remove all the front mud flaps off the Ram 1500's because they kept dragging in deep snow and ripping the front fenders off. The fenders would come off looking like a crumpled ball of tin-foil with a mud flap sticking out of it.


----------



## Electraglide (Jan 24, 2010)

bzrkrage said:


> Sent from my other brain.


I've had both. The station wagon was better at the drive in theater. The truck could carry more beer on runs.


----------



## butterknucket (Feb 5, 2006)

Electraglide said:


> I've had both. The station wagon was better at the drive in theater. The truck could carry more beer on runs.


I don't know how much fun the sword fish would be.


----------



## Electraglide (Jan 24, 2010)

butterknucket said:


> I don't know how much fun the sword fish would be.


I don't recall seeing a fish back there. Don't recall seeing a lot of movies either.


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

adcandour said:


> There's different strengths of aluminium. I'm not sure where you're getting your facts about this.
> 
> I also used to build passenger planes - lots of strong ass aluminum there too. I used to rivet on parts of the aileron and attached it as well (to a Q400). They had to handle some serious sheer force.


Correct, there is. The low alloys are soft and weldable, the higher, stronger alloys are brittle and have to be mechanically fastened. With aluminum, there is always a trade off.

Corrosion is also a factor. Everyone thinks aluminum doesn't rust, but it does corrode, especially in the presence of dissimilar metals and road salt. Ford isn't building a superior truck, they are just building a lighter one with a marketing strategy. I'm not sold on it being better. I'm going to be watching to see how they handle Ontario roads and contractor use

If I was the OP, I'd be looking into what Dodge is poised to bring out. Both Ford and GM have some great looking and driving trucks right now. Dodge is known to be the wait and change the game company. I'd say they're due


----------



## Jim DaddyO (Mar 20, 2009)

To be totally honest, if I were looking for a truck today, I wouldn't want anything on the market now. But....when I say truck, I would want one in the old fashion traditional sense. 2 doors, regular cab, 8 foot box, tough as nails, easily fixed. My parameters are a bit different than other peoples. Buy what you like, service your own needs and desires, I will still be a smart ass about it. I want to haul lumber and manure and gravel, and I don't want to worry about how pretty it is, or sensors throwing codes, or if it is "connected", and all the technical mumbo jumbo that goes with today's vehicles. I would go back to my '71 GMC 3/4 ton if I wanted a truck. I want something that I can fix with a pair of vise grips, a hammer (or a rock), maybe a couple of screwdrivers. You know, a TRUCK! When I bought my present car new in '07 I thought it may be the last vehicle I would buy that runs totally on petrol. I may re phrase that to "the last vehicle I buy with a friggin computer in it". Those things are a total PITA.


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

I think I have it narrowed down to one, after checking out 6 or 8. It isn't my first colour choice but whateves, it looks sharp. I've owned too many black vehicles in my life and I was ready for a change but end of the 2016's the picking is getting slim.


----------



## cboutilier (Jan 12, 2016)

TA462 said:


> Uninformed statements? LOL, OK. My neighbours truck had a plastic type box liner. The same type that I've had in every single one of my trucks, a Dodge and 3 GM's. My trucks had a few dings in the box after 5 years but my neighbours 2 month old Ford has around 20. Is that a defect in the liner or the poor designed aluminum floor?
> 
> Having a aluminum body has nothing to do with towing. I mentioned the ECO Boost motor as a poor choice for towing. Get the 5.0 if your going to get one.
> 
> ...


Honda released the aluminum bodied NSX in 1991 as well.


----------



## WCGill (Mar 27, 2009)

Go all out.

http://truckyeah.jalopnik.com/why-everyones-going-nuts-over-the-mercedes-pickup-truck-1788198689


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

WCGill said:


> Go all out.
> 
> http://truckyeah.jalopnik.com/why-everyones-going-nuts-over-the-mercedes-pickup-truck-1788198689


So Chrysler's entering the market?^)@#

Seriously though...It'd be cool to have one, but after talking to the accountants (and simple reasoning tells me), it's a bad idea to give clients the impression you make a ton of money.

I can't wait to see what yuppy knobs buy them.


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

Deleted.


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

adcandour said:


> So here's the room seen from what will be the "gym". It's got that little area to the right where I wanted the platform to go.
> 
> View attachment 34801
> 
> ...


Oooh...military grade steel studs!!
lol...sorry. I had to


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

WCGill said:


> Go all out.
> 
> http://truckyeah.jalopnik.com/why-everyones-going-nuts-over-the-mercedes-pickup-truck-1788198689


Oh jezuz...just when I thought the fish in a barrel trucks craze was dying off. At least it doesnt have stacks


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

vadsy said:


> I think I have it narrowed down to one, after checking out 6 or 8. It isn't my first colour choice but whateves, it looks sharp. I've owned too many black vehicles in my life and I was ready for a change but end of the 2016's the picking is getting slim.
> 
> View attachment 34521


good looking truck...Ford finally shook the final remnants of the car-truck look that began in 97. The last nice looking truck that ford produced was in 96, with the exception of the recent Limited's. Truthfully, the last Ford truck that I loved the look of was the 68-72 F100's. What can I say, I've always liked a crisp body style when it came to trucks. curves belong on women and cars


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

Scotty said:


> Oooh...military grade steel studs!!
> lol...sorry. I had to


Shit. Wrong thread. How tired do you have to be to do that. 

...and you didn't have to. 


adcandour said:


> So here's the room seen from what will be the "gym". It's got that little area to the right where I wanted the platform to go.
> 
> View attachment 34801
> 
> ...


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

Scotty said:


> good looking truck...Ford finally shook the final remnants of the car-truck look that began in 97. The last nice looking truck that ford produced was in 96, with the exception of the recent Limited's. Truthfully, the last Ford truck that I loved the look of was the 68-72 F100's. What can I say, I've always liked a crisp body style when it came to trucks. curves belong on women and cars


It's funny how your post covers so many of the years relevant to me and my Ford history. 1997 was my first Ford F150, used I bought off my dad, 4.6L. It lasted me a long time and was a pain to drive in the winter as it wasn't 4x4. The frame was broken at one point since my old man hauled water to the acreage with it, we welded the crap out of it and kept it around. 1996 was a company work truck I used for a long time, it was the oldest thing we had in the fleet and very unpopular due to the manual transmission. I liked it for the most part but hated the bench seat. 1969 was the year of a F100 a friend and I restored over a couple of summers. We stripped and blasted it, bondo filled and welded in new metal, replaced various parts and rebuilt the engine, finally set up a paint booth and got it done white and red. At one point we drove the country roads looking through the vehicle graveyards in farmers fields looking for chrome trim. The pile of empty beer cans after the two years of work and various little parties totalled over 900 bucks. Finally, I went travelling one summer and while I was gone my good bud replaced the large steering wheel with one of those tiny stupid chromed and chain ones, couldn't turn it proper due to the lack of power steering and totalled it Dukes of Hazard style. F


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

adcandour said:


> Shit. Wrong thread. How tired do you have to be to do that.
> 
> ...and you didn't have to.


oh come on, it was fun. 
nice cavernous basement btw


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

vadsy said:


> It's funny how your post covers so many of the years relevant to me and my Ford history. 1997 was my first Ford F150, used I bought off my dad, 4.6L. It lasted me a long time and was a pain to drive in the winter as it wasn't 4x4. The frame was broken at one point since my old man hauled water to the acreage with it, we welded the crap out of it and kept it around. 1996 was a company work truck I used for a long time, it was the oldest thing we had in the fleet and very unpopular due to the manual transmission. I liked it for the most part but hated the bench seat. 1969 was the year of a F100 a friend and I restored over a couple of summers. We stripped and blasted it, bondo filled and welded in new metal, replaced various parts and rebuilt the engine, finally set up a paint booth and got it done white and red. At one point we drove the country roads looking through the vehicle graveyards in farmers fields looking for chrome trim. The pile of empty beer cans after the two years of work and various little parties totalled over 900 bucks. Finally, I went travelling one summer and while I was gone my good bud replaced the large steering wheel with one of those tiny stupid chromed and chain ones, couldn't turn it proper due to the lack of power steering and totalled it Dukes of Hazard style. F


funny how coincidences pop up. I drove an 84 F150 for years with a buzzin half dozen and the 3 speed with granny low. Truck was ugly as sin with it 2 tone and egg crate grill, but I loved the UPS Rrrr, Rrrr take off at the light, as piss poor as it was...it "sounded" like a truck. My ultimate fave trucks are GM though (sorry). The mid 60's and then the C/K line, especially the 87's. The 68/72 Fords shared the same proportions as both of those, which is why I am fond of them


----------



## vadsy (Dec 2, 2010)

Scotty said:


> My ultimate fave trucks are GM though (sorry).


Don't be sorry. I've had them for work trucks and the fancy ones are nice, it's also what my dad drives now and it seems great.


----------



## Electraglide (Jan 24, 2010)

Jim DaddyO said:


> To be totally honest, if I were looking for a truck today, I wouldn't want anything on the market now. But....when I say truck, I would want one in the old fashion traditional sense. 2 doors, regular cab, 8 foot box, tough as nails, easily fixed. My parameters are a bit different than other peoples. Buy what you like, service your own needs and desires, I will still be a smart ass about it. I want to haul lumber and manure and gravel, and I don't want to worry about how pretty it is, or sensors throwing codes, or if it is "connected", and all the technical mumbo jumbo that goes with today's vehicles. I would go back to my '71 GMC 3/4 ton if I wanted a truck. I want something that I can fix with a pair of vise grips, a hammer (or a rock), maybe a couple of screwdrivers. You know, a TRUCK! When I bought my present car new in '07 I thought it may be the last vehicle I would buy that runs totally on petrol. I may re phrase that to "the last vehicle I buy with a friggin computer in it". Those things are a total PITA.


A man after my own heart.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

WCGill said:


> Go all out.
> 
> http://truckyeah.jalopnik.com/why-everyones-going-nuts-over-the-mercedes-pickup-truck-1788198689


Nice looking truck. But I don't see the point in owning a truck you might be too scared to actually use due to the expensive repairs and upkeep. Might make sense in Europe where it can compete on a more even foot with their imports, in terms of cost.


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

Jim DaddyO said:


> To be totally honest, if I were looking for a truck today, I wouldn't want anything on the market now. But....when I say truck, I would want one in the old fashion traditional sense. 2 doors, regular cab, 8 foot box, tough as nails, easily fixed. My parameters are a bit different than other peoples. Buy what you like, service your own needs and desires, I will still be a smart ass about it. I want to haul lumber and manure and gravel, and I don't want to worry about how pretty it is, or sensors throwing codes, or if it is "connected", and all the technical mumbo jumbo that goes with today's vehicles. I would go back to my '71 GMC 3/4 ton if I wanted a truck. I want something that I can fix with a pair of vise grips, a hammer (or a rock), maybe a couple of screwdrivers. You know, a TRUCK! When I bought my present car new in '07 I thought it may be the last vehicle I would buy that runs totally on petrol. I may re phrase that to "the last vehicle I buy with a friggin computer in it". Those things are a total PITA.


I thought this was pretty cool. 

After having a chat with a contractor I deal with on occasion, he had nothing but good things to say about the Toyota Tacoma (He, and his boss, drives one). His boss prefers it to his Cayenne Turbo. I had to look into them.

They use them for war, since they rarely need repair (since they're not close to any repair facility).

Check this out:

Technical (vehicle) - Wikipedia

Anyway,

After going to the dealership at Toyota and pricing out two 2017 Tundra's, I was SHOCKED at how much more value I was getting. for LESS MONEY. 

Here are the differences:

$117,000 for the 2 fords (2016)
$110,000 for the 2 Tundras (2017)

Toyota is giving me an extra $3500 on my trade-ins (What?!?)
The base tundra is essentially fully loaded compared to the base Ford.
The tundras at that price have an extended warranty that covers EVERYTHING outside of maintenance for 200,000kms.
10% of all maintenance costs go onto a card and gets used toward your next Toyota purchase.
I have a card that gets me 15% off of a ton of places around town that can be used for as long as I own the trucks (Milestones, Boston Pizza, etc.)
The resale value is DOUBLE what I'll be getting for the Fords when I bring them in. 
Roadside assistance for 200km, towing, all included in the above price.
Wrap and black-out package included in that price.

My dad has disowned me, but business is business. 

TBH, my dad has worked for them as well and thinks they're fantastic (and will likely in the future), it's just that all his close friends are Ford guys, so I just won't drive them to Ohio and ruin family dinners, haha.


----------



## LanceT (Mar 7, 2014)

adcandour said:


> I thought this was pretty cool.
> 
> After having a chat with a contractor I deal with on occasion, he had nothing but good things to say about the Toyota Tacoma (He, and his boss, drives one). His boss prefers it to his Cayenne Turbo. I had to look into them.
> 
> ...


Interesting to note Toyota is playing the incentive game. I can understand I suppose as they sell maybe 10 Tundra's to every 100 F150s.

Not so fast on Tundra's resale; Vincentric Names Best Certified Pre-Owned Pickups - PickupTrucks.com News


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

LanceT said:


> Interesting to note Toyota is playing the incentive game. I can understand I suppose as they sell maybe 10 Tundra's to every 100 F150s.
> 
> Not so fast on Tundra's resale; Vincentric Names Best Certified Pre-Owned Pickups - PickupTrucks.com News


I'd need to know more about the metrics. They're looking at _depreciation, fees and taxes, financing, fuel consumption, insurance, maintenance, opportunity costs and repairs_, but what does that really mean?

The award is for "_Best Certified Pre-Owned Value_". I'm fairly certain that's not associated to best ROI.


----------



## Jim DaddyO (Mar 20, 2009)

Mine was in much rougher shape. But I would go for something like this again.


----------



## Electraglide (Jan 24, 2010)

Jim DaddyO said:


> Mine was in much rougher shape. But I would go for something like this again.


Too new.







When my brother comes back from Australia we'll move the '51 and the '52 to his shop. The '52 is about this shape but the tires are flat.


----------



## bluebayou (May 25, 2015)

If you are a real keener gear head buy a Land Rover!! Phenominal community of gear heads devoted to Land Rovers and tons of fun off roading. Lots of Land Rover rallys around NOrth America take you to some incredible places.
I loved driving them and going to rallies and the social aspect but I'm not enough of a gear head to keep one.


----------



## Jim DaddyO (Mar 20, 2009)

Electraglide said:


> Too new.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yup! That will do just nicely too.



bluebayou said:


> If you are a real keener gear head buy a Land Rover!! Phenominal community of gear heads devoted to Land Rovers and tons of fun off roading. Lots of Land Rover rallys around NOrth America take you to some incredible places.
> I loved driving them and going to rallies and the social aspect but I'm not enough of a gear head to keep one.


Now we are back to aluminium bodies....lol. Land Rovers are great though. At least the old ones. I knew a gut that had an 88, and a shirt that said "Jeeps are only famous, Land Rovers are legendary"


----------



## Electraglide (Jan 24, 2010)

Jim DaddyO said:


> Yup! That will do just nicely too.
> 
> 
> 
> Now we are back to aluminium bodies....lol. Land Rovers are great though. At least the old ones. I knew a gut that had an 88, and a shirt that said "Jeeps are only famous, Land Rovers are legendary"


Had a 67 Nissan Patrol for a few years.....the younger bro had a 68. Never rallied it but did a lot of 4wdriving all over BC hunting, fishing, camping and the like.


----------



## Wardo (Feb 5, 2010)

Got my 2010 150 oil sprayed again today. The truck might outlast me and it's paid for so that's that I guess.


----------

