Trucks...any difference?

Might be in the market for a truck. Needs to be full sized and extended cab, 1/2 ton, gas powered. I intend to use it as a truck and I have the Mrs. and two smallish kids. Towing a 4000-6000 lb RV trailer etc. Ford vs. GM. 1995-ish to 2005-ish. Interested in things like power, durability, rear seat comfort, trouble spots, real-world fuel economy, you name it. Discuss please.

I really like my 98 GMC Sierra 1500. Towing capacity of 6600lbs, 4wd, extended cab, it's got all that. I have a small open deck steel trailer and towing a 98 Cobra from Philadelphia to Mid-Ohio I averaged just under 16mpg. Unfortunately due to space constraints it may be up for sale soon.

If you get a chevy, get the 2001? and newer with the 5.3 or 6.0. The older vortec ones arent real reliable (mainly intake leaks).

That would be 99 and newer for 1/2 ton trucks, and I while I would agree they are probably a nicer truck I wouldn't necessarily call the last of the traditional small block chevy motors not reliable. My '90 has over a quarter million miles and has never had any intake issues, in fact this is the first mention I've ever heard of any. The TBI 350 and 2WD 5-speed in mine average 15-17 pulling something and 17-20 empty.

I bought a 2005 F250 crew cab last year. It rides ok for a truck, better with a load in it. I love the folding racks under the rear seats that makes the floor level when the rear seats are raised. I get 8.8 mpg in town, on the highway or towing a 20 foot enclosed car trailer. It got 8.8 before the tune up, it gets 8.8 after the tune up, and nothing I do changes that number.

I just read this morning that some ChryCo dealers are offering 50% off on '08 trucks. That might be interesting to look at.

06 Crew Cab GMC. 4.8L 2wd with 3.23 rear end. consistently knocks down 22-24mpg unloaded, 17mpg towing 1700lb car on 1400lb steel trailer. Super comfy, rides good and drives good.

With that said, I've also owned 3 other GM trucks, a sonoma reg cab (mistake) and a pair of OBS gmc's. The 93 Ext Cab shortbed was nice truck. V6 5spd got 24mpg on the highway. but was never really powerful enough. The 89 Reg Cab V6 5spd was similar (minus the ext cab) in ride/mileage and it too was really never strong enough. THe jump to the GMT800 platform in 99 was a huge step. The NBS trucks are so nice, more refined, better seats/interior and the LSx motors are amazing. To think that the 4.8L in my tuck makes 100hp more than the old 5.7L in my 9C1 and the same torque boggle the mind.

I had a 2005 F150 with the 5.4l engine in it. Towing a ~3000 trailer, I would get 15mpg, not towing (which was very, very rare) it would get 18. Super nice truck to pull with, but if I had to live with it a long time, I would get a nicer interior package.

There is a real 4 door version of that, too, which would have been cool. Ours was a smaller 4 door, but it appeared that the rear jump seat was quite comfortable.

Before that, we had 3 Rangers with extended cabs. All would get around 20mpg w/o the trailer, 15 with it. All pulled the trailer pretty easily.

Eric

Just curious why you've discounted diesels? My father's '02 F-350 with the 7.3L Powerstroke was able to get just shy of 18mpg towing a foxbody GT convertible on a car trailer NOT on flat ground. And that's with an automatic.

Personally, I'd be skiddish to tow with an OHC motor as would be in a '97 and newer Ford. Maybe their fantastic, but my experience with mod motors is that they prefer rpm, and that just doesn't make sense to me for towing. I'd rather not have to be turning 5k rpm all the way up every hill. On the flipside of that, though, the smaller displacement nature of those motors SHOULD make them more fuel-efficient.

It's not so much that I've discounted diesels. My dad has an '03 Duramax that is really nice, pulls like a train, and gets good mileage. I'd just rather have a 1/2 truck rather than a 3/4 truck, and a gas engine is typically IMO easier and cheaper to repair down the road a few years, not to mention around here they are cheaper up-front. Money and space constraints dictate that when its not pulling/hauling, it will likely be my dd. Thanks all for the opinions so far.

I had a '89 F150 2wd with the 300ci Inline six and a 5-spd. It was an awesome truck. The 4.9 has gobs of torque (more than the 5.0 IIRC) and it would consistently return 24-25mpg.

They used this motor until 1995.

I have a 2001 2500 HD crew with the 6.0. 2 wheel drive and no one has complained about being in the back seat for hours on end, and there have been long road trips to race with the Royale and pick up various Yugos and Le Cars from this board, as well as trips to pick up other car purchases and general truck duties.

Towing, with some sort of cover on the bed I would get 16-18 no matter what the load. Currently 13x,xxx miles and it's been a good truck. Piston slap seems to be more of a sound annoyance than having an impact.

It's more than I really need, but when I bought it new there was no crew cab half ton so I stepped up. It's kind of nice to know I'm no where near making this truck struggle. It's big with the 6.5 bed, but I work in an urban setting and it can still make it's way around. I'm not sure I'd be able to with the long bed crew.

Here's my take having owned some of each.

Chevy used a TBI engine from 87-95. They are really wussy. The TBI flows about 390 cfm, the intake ports have big swirl vanes cast in them, and the cams are tiny... like 167 degrees tiny. They also have faulty valve seals that leak. Its not a reliability issue, they just have a nice puff of blue smoke to let you know that the engine started :) 96-99 trucks have the Vortec heads. Yes, they tend to leak at the driver's side rear water passage gasket. Its not a big deal, just fix it with FelPro gaskets when they start leaking. The engines are great. The Vortec is the single best-flowing small block head chevy every made. Good stuff with a ton of potential. Late 99-present trucks use the LS1-based 4.8, 5.3, and 6.0. They are all fine engines, but stick to the larger displacements if you tow a lot. The 6.0 makes nice torque, but it likes to drink gas fast. I forget what I actually got from mine, but it was 4-5 mpg worse than the EPA estimates.

Fords use the 4.6 and 5.4. Both are not beacons of power or torque, but they have proven to have VERY long, trouble-free lives. There aren't any specific updates they made over the years, but 99 they switched to a different intake and head configuration. Some repairs can be a little tough to reach, but not terrible. I just bought a 98 F150 with the 4.6 and it had 123k on it. I didn't hesitate for a second. I've had a few that went 250k+ without so much as a sensor failure. Pretty reliable pieces. They're wimpy, but I didn't hesitate to use a 99 4.6L F150 to tow 6000 cross country from L.A. to Rochester NY and back twice with my foot to the floor. I worked it hard (had to over the rockies :) and that truck is still going strong with 200k

Just an idea... pre-99 Chevy 1/2 tons could be ordered with the 6.5 diesel. They should be updated with a remote injector computer mount and a couple other upgrades for reliability, but they make mounds of towing torque and get up to 20 mpg. They're also just a chip, intake, and exhaust away from pushing 300 hp/500 tq. Since diesel is about the same price as gas these days, 20 mpg sounds pretty nice. You could also snag an early Duramax for pretty cheap.

Opinions:

GM gets the win for rear seat comfy. Ford gets the win for longevity of engine. GM seems to fall a little short in the electronics reliability department. I have an 04 Duramax that keeps going to CD3 every time I turn the key on, and the dash information center keeps flickering and showing random characters. I had an 98 6.5L that kept blowing rear brake light bulbs. GM gets the win for a more comfy ride, but only by a little. Ford gets the win for seats that look uncomfortable but are nice to ride in. GM gets the can for seats that look great but make your butt fall asleep on long trips. I'll take the vinyl bench in my 98 F150 over the leather buckets in my dad's 09 Duramax. Seriously.

Other little notes... Ford's F150 was old body style up to 96 with no third door available. 97-98 had a third fold out door on the passenger side. 99-03 had four doors with a rear door on both sides.

I also take issue with the cheaper to repair down the road thing. I used to maintain a fleet of up to 200 trucks from all three, gas and diesel, 1/2 ton up to 1-ton. Start to finish, a diesel truck put WAY more money back in our pockets. Reliability, longevity, resale value, maintenance, etc. Its true that oil changes are more expensive and more frequent, cost of some parts is more expensive, and there is always the scary and expensive injector pump fear, but overall, it will cost less start to finish than a gas truck. Don't avoid one because they're more expensive to maintain/repair. If anything avoid one because they will be more expensive if they are problematic. If you're a good shadetree mechanic, don't hesitate to buy one.

I would also (if you're thinking about a GM) strongly urge you to go 3/4 ton if for no other reason than the 4L80E tranny. The 4L60E in the 1/2 tons is just not that great. Expect it to die around 120k if not sooner. The Ford trannys are only marginally better, but I haven't had any trouble from mine.

Thanks for all the info. Lots of internet chatter re: piston slap on the LSx engines. Any experiences with that?

If you are willing to go older, 300/6 FTW. I drove a '93 F150 with that motor and the 5spd. Aside from the clutch in bumper-to-bumper traffic, I loved it.

What about 4wd and bed length, any preferance?

Ford's 5.4 is a great engine. Not real big on torque, but it will turn 3500-4000 for hours on end pulling a 7000# enclosed trailer behind a 7000# van. If you keep the speeds reasonable it will get about 10 mpg towing in the van, probably better in the truck. The older ones have piston slap when cold, but it doesn't seem to hurt them. The earlier engines also have been known to spit spark plugs. They used a short thread plug and they would rip the threads out of the heads. The newer engines have long threads. They can be a real *itch to work on. It took me almost five hours to change the plugs on my van because the coils are under the fuel rail. Coils are also a weak link. In nine years I have replaced four of them due to cracking and shorting.

I will say this, the only reason I don't have a Dodge with the Cummins diesel is my father has one I can borrow, and my van is paid for. If you are going to tow a lot, buy a diesel. The Dodge diesel will tow a 35' camper at 75 MPH and still get 12-14 MPG. Back the speed down to 65-70 and it will get 16-17 pulling the camper. Empty it gets 21-22 mpg. The back seat on the crew cab Dodge is huge. With three kids in the back the don't have to sit sideways or on top of each other. Having driven and towed with the Dodge and the Fords, I would say the best diesel is in the Dodge, the best interior is in the Ford.

Toyman01 wrote: I will say this, the only reason I don't have a Dodge with the Cummins diesel is my father has one I can borrow, and my van is paid for. If you are going to tow a lot, buy a diesel. The Dodge diesel will tow a 35' camper at 75 MPH and still get 12-14 MPG. Back the speed down to 65-70 and it will get 16-17 pulling the camper. Empty it gets 21-22 mpg. The back seat on the crew cab Dodge is huge. With three kids in the back the don't have to sit sideways or on top of each other. Having driven and towed with the Dodge and the Fords, I would say the best diesel is in the Dodge, the best interior is in the Ford.

I will agree that the Cummins is a very good motor. However, I remember hearing that the running gear in the Dodges is the same from the 2500-up, no matter what engine is in there, and this causes the diesels to just destroy things up front due to the extra weight of the motor. This may have been in the 4x4 trucks only, but I'd check it out if you chose to go down this path.

I will say that I've had one experience with the Triton V10, and as much as I wanted to despise that motor, I just couldn't. The truck I was driving had the optional tow/haul mode automatic, and I flat loved it. It was a little thristy, (I think I got 10mpg towing a '78 Corolla on a trailer), but seemingly no thirstier than the 5.4L, it had power in spades, and the tow-haul mode totally made up for it being an auto.

The early Cummins were bad about destroying the tranny and axles. Dodge did a pretty good job of beefing up the trucks though. My uncle had a 91 he put 450K on. His last truck, a 01 had 330K when he sold it to a friend, it's still on the road. His current truck, a 06 has 180k on it. The 91 he had problem with the axles. Had them rebuilt once. The 01 had a tranny puke at about 250K. The 06 hasn't had any problems. All of these were 4x4s. My father has had two. One was a 02, the auto trans puked about 140K. 50K of that 140K was pulling a 12000# camper all over the country. He traded it on a 06 and it has been flawless.

30k ball joint changes on the 4wd dodge's are not unheard of.. Beyond that they are great trucks. Get a manual trans and you'll have a very soild combo.

As for the OP, I think for your uses any of the big three trucks will do just fine. I've seen all three brands last a long time. You could even look at an early v8 Tundra. I think the key for you will be condition. Buy the best maintained truck you can find and you'll do well.

Dodge build quality is not good. Chronic ball joint issues, everything built to a price. I ditched the Mopar for Toyota and am thoroughly pleased. I needed a small truck, but if I had the room I'd have gone for the last body style Tundra in Xtra-cab, 2wd, w/ the 5.7 V8, though truth told, the 3.4 V6 has a surprising amount of ass. 'Specially when you turn off the O/D and select the the "power mode" button.

motomoron wrote: everything built to a price.

I worked in purchasing at a supplier of Dodge's... This is 100% true. We also supplied to Ford and other manufacturers. The other manufactures were concerned about quality and performance and price. I had multiple reviews with german engineers who reverse engineered our product and told us how to make our parts cheaper.. Ugh.

We used Tundra V6 Long bed reg cabs in my previous job for deliveries. I never saw the V6 2wd get over 16mpg. Even on a couple long 4 hour highway trips running close to the speed limit (tons of police). Sad when I had GM V6 trucks knocking down 24+mpg on the same roads.

The worst part was the 2 transmissions we replaced by 140k miles. We did all scheduled maintenance by the book (we were a dealer, kinda sad if we didin't!). Still destroyed 2 trannies in less time than any of my GM's.

I've owned a '95 C1500 ext cab since 1996 (bought at 23k), and it's been very reliable and inexpensive. My 5.7 has been plenty powerful when towing my Miata/trailer. The vortec engines came out in '96, as well as the ext cab door (I think). I really wish I had these options, but when I bought, they were too expensive.

Back when I had puny 235/75R15 tires, I could get 15 mpg combined. Now I put 265/75 Goodyear Wranglers, and while the truck looks much "tougher," I only get about 12 mpg--even less while towing.

I also have a 5 speed, which I hate. GM makes great automatics--don't punish yourself with a manual.

You can get a '99 or newer for not-that-much right now. I'd not bother with the '96-'99's, as they're too old, getting rusty (rocker, ext cab panels, and doors), and may be worn-out.

I'd also look for rear disc brakes, as GM's puny 10" drums aren't the best.

Bobzilla wrote: We used Tundra V6 Long bed reg cabs in my previous job for deliveries. I never saw the V6 2wd get over 16mpg. Even on a couple long 4 hour highway trips running close to the speed limit (tons of police). Sad when I had GM V6 trucks knocking down 24+mpg on the same roads. The worst part was the 2 transmissions we replaced by 140k miles. We did all scheduled maintenance by the book (we were a dealer, kinda sad if we didin't!). Still destroyed 2 trannies in less time than any of my GM's.

My 4x4, 5.7 liter, double-cab Tundra gets that towing... .

Toyota seems to win the prize for putting a 4 or a 6 in a truck and getting crappy mileage.