Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options

'99 Silverado/Sierra vs. F-150

1235710

Comments

  • zbad71zbad71 Member Posts: 226
    All you Ford people are totally ignorant of the torque curve of the 5.3l! Your "peak" torque ratings sure look like there is huge advantage on paper. NOT!!! Sure, there is a 15 lb "peak" torque advantage at "Fords peak rpm" at about 3200 rpm. What marketing dorks don't show is that Fords "peak torque" STOPS AT ABOUT 3200 rpm and "drastically drops". I said DRASTICALLY DROPS! That means that past 3200 rpm, they can push that gutless Ford to rpm cutoff and never gain any more out of the engine! The Silverado 5.3l is only 15 lbs under the Fords peak, even at 3200 rpm, but continues that peak all the way at 4000 rpm where it "gradually" starts to decline. This means that the Silverado has its peak torque of "only 15 lbs less" from about 2300 rpm to about 4000 rpm. Ford wants eveyone to think that the GM truck doesn't have ANY real torque until 4000 rpm and that is just not true. Nice try, but they didn't slip that by too many people like they would have liked.

    That brings be to rebute Rocles point of more torque at the low end. Sure, the F150 may have a vey slight amount of torque advantage in the very low end, but both being a 1/2 ton truck, that 15 lbs of torque is basically not even noticeable when using the truck as a 1/2 ton would be used. The difference would shine truer if they were heavy duty work trucks and need that every bit of torque advantage to get extremely heavy loads started. With a 1/2 ton truck, mid range torque is what is more important. You pull a 4000 lb boat for instance. Both the F150 5.4l and the Silverado 5.3l are going to show very negligible differences in the low end to get the load started. I had no problems what so ever with either truck starting off with a load. Where the Silverado 5.3l shows its superiority is on the highway in the mid range torque. Its no secret that the torque curve of the Ford at mid range rpm (highway speeds) is much less than the Silverado. Silverado has the flat torque curve all the way out to 4000 rpm. Even with a 15 lbs less torque disadvantage, the Silverado more than makes up for that having that torque curve continue past 3200 rpm all the way to 4000 rpm, where past 3200 rpm, the Ford has nothing more to offer. That is why when I towed my boat with the Ford, I had to literally stand on the accelerator and go from overdrive all the way down to 2nd gear and tach the rpm out to hell and back to get any performance or tow power on the highway.
    My Silverado is much more responsive to tow up hills, pass on the highway, etc.

    Aside from all the charts and curves, having driven both and towed with both, my actual driving experience with both proves to me more than any chart or biased marketing ploy can tell, that the Chevy Silverado 5.3l is STILL the towing truck leader. Always has been in past years with the 1/2 tons and continues to do so today.

    Not only that, but think about how well this new 5.3l and even the 4.8l is built. Even going on all this hoopla about having to rev the Chevy engines higher to gain the torque, the Chevy has proven to be able to sustain the higher revs with the new design that drives the oil pump off the crankshaft. The Fords block only has 4 main bearing caps where the Chevy has 6 cross-bolted caps. That in itself proves how much more rigid and durable the Vortec engine is.

    f220swift:

    Your information sounds good, but is pure bogus crap. The 5.3l is NEVER more than 15 lbs less torque than the 5.4l and it continues that 315 lbs of torque all the way out to 4000 rpm after the Ford stops at 3200.

    Hell, I can make up for 15 lbs of torque in just one simple inexpensive aftermarket bolt on.

    The backyard mechanics torque theories claimed by the Ford people show just how little they know about where torque is most beneficial in a tow vehicle. How often does ANYONE tow "entirely" in the low rpm range that the Ford has the so-called torque advantage. NONE.

    smcpherr:

    Again, I am glad your Ford is so awesome. If I were you, I would hold on to it for as long as I could because youre the only one that I know whos Ford has performed so well, and gotten ??19 mpg??I am not calling you a liar, but that is awfully unrealistic. Are you sure you calculate your fuel economy correctly? Even the Ford guys that have bragged about their fuel economy have not seen 19 mpg under the best of driving conditions. I never saw better than 15 mpg with my 4.6l, EVER. Most of the time it was about 14 mpg. I would not have complained about the poor gas mileage if it could perform, but it just plain didn't.

    And why would you want a truck that sits bigger? The Ford "body" does sit higher and may look better to the high school kids who like to lift their trucks to ridiculous heights, but the Ford has no ground clearance advantage from it and its harder to get in and out of.

    You also didn't look at very many models of the Silverado because you don't have to get a truck with the console. I did because I like it, but you can get one without a console and with the autotrac, you won't have any thing on the floor (i.e., manual 4X4). The Silverado also has the cheesy 60 40 seat with the flip down compartment like the Fords have, but most Chevy owners don't get it because they don't like it and because its a downgrade for the Chevy where its an upgrade on the Ford.

    valare:

    My opinion is that, even though the 4.3l V6 is a good torquey and reliable engine, I think you will be unhappy with it in a full size truck. The 4.8l will do much more for about the same fuel economy and not much more up front cost. I just don't believe in a six cylinder in any full size truck. The only six I have found to be adequate in a full size truck is, unfortunately, the Ford I-300, which they do not produce anymore. Even it was not good for a lot of highway towing. Did fine, but rapped up too much rpm to do it, which in the same case, the V8's could do it much easier and with less fuel.
  • bigsnagbigsnag Member Posts: 394
    ZBAD,
    Why don't you and all of the other guys who think this new Chevy engine is the second coming of Christ check out this site.

    http://www.trucktrend.com/feb99/4x4/4x4_f.html

    The article matches Chevy vs. Ford. Guess who wins?

    FORD !!!

    These trucks were evenly matched, 5.4 vs. 5.3 except the Chevy even had lower gears, 3.73. It still lost. All of this talk about Chevy having more power is total BS. It somes down to what a motor actually puts out to the rear wheels. Chevy doesn't compare.

    Ford ran into this problem with the 99 Cobra's. Advertised 320 hp, but none of them are actually producing that. Sure Chevy claims high torque and hp, but line 'em up and it will LOSE. Fact.

    If that's not enough, the Ford wins when it comes to ride and on the slalom.

    By the way, I am late in getting into this, but I can't help but jump in, when so many ignorant statements are being thrown around.
  • ferris47ferris47 Member Posts: 131
    The last paragraph on page 5 of the article in Truck Trend that you linked two sums it all up period. Why bother with the my truck is better than your truck crap when all three are great trucks......ok have my doubts about the Dodge but that is another story.
  • bigsnagbigsnag Member Posts: 394
    You are quite correct, all are good trucks, even the new Toyota is raising the standards. I was just responding to comments about certain aspects of each truck, made by other people.
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    Yes I can read articles as well. It looks like the F-150 w/5.4l has an advantage in peak torque, which is somewhat important. It's about 5% greater? And it's got a 4th door option - nice too. I still think there are many more advantages to the GM/Chevy products.
    Well I'm off to read the topic 5.4L (L is for Lemon).
  • quadrunner500quadrunner500 Member Posts: 2,721
    It looks like the F150 beats Silverado by a pretty good margin on acceleration, and the Silverado beats F150 by a pretty good margin in braking performance.

    Somebody ought to put 1000-2000 lbs in both and do a 0-70-0 test. Probably a dead heat.
  • zbad71zbad71 Member Posts: 226
    I don't need to read any tests or articles. I have already said in earlier posts that all that is biased nonsense and lays no actual truth to anyone but the person who did the test.

    Having OWNED, DRIVEN, AND TOWED with both a 98 Ford F150 Ext Cab 4X4 and the new model Silverado equally equipped, I know, FOR ME, the Ford just doesn't even compare. My lengthy post goes into more detail than I am going to ramble on about again.

    All I will say here is that the ONLY advantage I have seen even in these biased tests is that the Ford has a slight low end torque advantage. But again, nobody will ever see the difference in towing with either one. That small amount is so negligible, it almost just doesn't matter. The only time it may even remotely make a difference is if both trucks were compared at the start of pulling their max towing capacities, which these light duty trucks should never be doing anyway.

    The Silverado's flat curve makes it much better for the all around use. In a 1/2 ton truck, most people pull boats, small campers, etc which usually never see over 4500-5000 lbs tow. If they are towing more than that consistently, they are not wise and should have bought more truck.
    The mid range (highway driving) of the Silverado is much more adapted to the type of use it is designed.

    If a person only towed or used their truck within the city limits, Ford may be able to claim their F150 to have a whopping 15 lbs torque advantage. Big deal. I have said before, a cheap aftermarket like a good catback exhaust more than makes up that small amount of torque difference even if it were noticeable.

    With all the problems (not minor problems I might add) I personally had with the new model F150, I would rather have less torque and have the advantages of much more from the Chevy.

    In response to your article....Any Chevy owner can find just as many test articles and the like that choose the Chevy over the F150 as you can the opposite. Its called marketing and who paid who to say what.

    Why do pro bass fisherman all drive Chevy's to tow their 6000 lbs rigs? Have for years. Seldom do you see them use a Ford or Dodge. They rely on those trucks to get them to tournaments so they can earn a living. Gotta show something.

    I am through with this. Everyone knows who the truck leader is. Comon Ford guy's, quit being sore losers. You may just be the leader next year. Doubtful, but things are really competitive so one never knows. If Ford does end up with a winner. I won't whine and try to tout my Chevy as being better. I may just have to buy another Ford.....simple as that.
  • smcpherrsmcpherr Member Posts: 114
    Zbad71 - I have the numbers sitting right in front of me for my trip to Wisconsin.
    Nebraska to Wisconsin:
    407 miles / 21.2 gal = 19.20 mpg
    Wisconsin to Nebraska:
    371 miles / 19.96 gal = 18.59 mpg
    Before you guys get on my case about the difference in miles, the trip is roughly 500 miles. I topped off the tank in Lincoln before I left to Wisconsin, I topped off the tank in Beloit on the way home. Those figures are made with 100% interstate driving, between 65 and 75 mph, non-stop. I know it does sound unrealistic, but unless the odometer is lying (which it's not, I checked it), I got some damn good gas mileage. I don't happen to have the figures in front of me now for my regular city driving, but I know when I topped off my tank in Lincoln before I left I figured it out to be approximately 17 mpg, all city driving. Maybe we just have better gas in the Midwest. I know when I was in LA with the 4.6L, I got much worse gas mileage than when at home (usually 12-14 in town, 16-18 interstate in LA vs. 14-18 in town, 18-22 interstate in Nebraska). I have always been curious about that, I asked about that in the gas mileage topic a while ago and no one gave me a good answer. Any one here wanna try?

    Also, as to why I want a truck that sits bigger. I am not referring to the height of the truck. I am talking about how I feel when sitting in it, relative to the interior of the truck. Everything is away from me, yet still within my reach. I need my space. At 6'6", 300 lbs, an ex-track and football guy (and born and raised a Cornhusker, none the less...), I do appreciate being able to stretch my legs out a bit to reach the pedals. I won't drive cars for that reason, they feel too crowded, everything feels like it is too close, and half the gadgets in the car required a degree of flexibility I naver have been able to produce. Blazers and Explorers have the same problem, and that is how I felt sitting inside the Silverado. Yes, I know there are models that don't have floor consoles, but I guess it had more to do with the placement of other parts of the interior. Felt way too cramped. That and I still couldn't see out the drivers side window. I got the flip down console for the 40-60 split bench, it wasn't an upgrade. The captains chair were the upgrade. My bench seating was standard on the XLT.
  • bigsnagbigsnag Member Posts: 394
    Kernick,
    Yes you can read but you can't do math.
    At the rear wheels (which is what matters) the Ford has a 26.6% greater peak torque and 14.2% greater peak HP.

    ZBad,
    In many of your other posts you state, that the Ford gives out after 3200 RPM. Now I know articles can be biased (That's why Chevy was rated higher by Truck Trend, based on subjective features, they actually downplayed performance numbers), but this article shows that even at 4500 RPM the Ford still has 13.2% greater torque and 13.2% greater HP.
    As far as all of these other articles that Chevy guys can come up with... Well.. Come up with them. All of you guys are more biased than a magazine. I, personally, have yet to see an article where a Chevy had more power to the rear wheels, neither on a dyno nor from a head to head race.
    Let me know what you find so I can look at it, too. Oh, and please stick to real numbers, not some writers opinion about how fast the new Chevy'e are.
  • zbad71zbad71 Member Posts: 226
    Well...Like I said, I am not calling you a liar (at 6.6 and 300 lbs that would be hazardous to my health! ha ha). I can't explain why your truck is getting such good mileage. I also am in the Midwest (Suburb of Kansas City) and I never got more than 15 mpg with my Ford.

    All I can say is, enjoy your truck. Sounds as if you got one of the few good ones.

    Take Care.
  • leathal02leathal02 Member Posts: 114
    you can believe what you want to believe about that article

    others have done the same kind of test with the same trucks, and totally different #'s are present

    in fact, i believe motortrend did the same test as trucktrend and they had way better #'s on the chevy

    anyways, if chevy were to put there biggest small block V-8(the 6 liter) into the same truck, then there would be no competition

    they are more or less comparing two of the largest small block V-8's to a medium small block V-8

    even though the the the displacement(mainly for the ford) would be different everything else would be the same, except for the #'s after the 6.0 whoops up on the others

    anyways, dont believe what you see in a magazine, real life experience is more informing than some magazine article, me, i have w whole lot better experiences with chevy, 1/2 tons and up, so i'll always probably buy a chevy
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    Let's see I once had a Ford Mustang 5.0, oh sorry the Ford boys just liked that number... it was really a 4.9 L
    Maybe Ford has cleaned up their act. How about that new '99 Cobra huh, 4.6L DOHC, 320 hp ... oops that's been recalled and production stopped, the power's so far down.
    Do you want to hear about the Ford Escort I once owned, that broke the timingbelt at 13,500 and ruined the engine?
    Triton's a nice name though.
  • bigsnagbigsnag Member Posts: 394
    In response to my post containing the link to the article, all of you have given your opinion and cited, what I'll refer to as "ether articles". No proof that they exist, but you are sure they do and in them the Chevy's numbers should be better.

    You know, you all sound like a bunch of Mustang owners trying to say a Mustang is as fast as a Cam/Bird. It isn't. Which one is a better car is still up for debate. What's not is that the Mustang is slower.

    Bottom line: You wanted to talk performance, so I did, and I backed it up, maybe not by a final authority, but I did give some evidence, not just an opinion.

    Kernick,
    If you would have read my earlier post, it was ME, the Ford supporter, who first pointed out the problems with the Cobra. I was attempting to be objective and show why Chevy number's about their 5.3 HP and torque might be a little exaggerated.
  • mudrivermudriver Member Posts: 7
    All you Ford Lovers need to check out Topic #776 ( BEWARE )
  • RoclesRocles Member Posts: 982
    Kernick,
    Gee, Name-dropping an Escort for Fords rep? How about the Chevette or Cavalier? How was that even close here? Big Snag has hit her on the nose--it's all about power to rear-wheel. Being a Motorcycle enthuist-I know all about "claimed" HP figures. Harley always claims about 15-20 hp more than the dyno will reveal. That's big when comparing small engines.

    ZBAD,
    So which story are you sticking to? Did you "own" a 4.2L or 4.6 or the 5.4L?? Does your silver-RADo have a 5.3 or 6.0??

    Classic Chevy arguments.....OOOOHH look at my engine! While the rest of the truck falls apart. Hey Bowties out there---Why does Ford sell so many trucks? No. The 450 dollar difference isn't it. If they were so bad they would be selling as many trucks Dodge did for years. Remember? Dodge was always cheaper as well but couldn't sell their trucks.
  • zbad71zbad71 Member Posts: 226
    You could not have said it any better.

    You and I seem to be on the same track.
  • zbad71zbad71 Member Posts: 226
    I owned a gutless 4.6l Ford. I now own a very capable 5.3l Chevy.

    I have driven and towed with all three. My best friend owns a 99 with 5.4l. Yeah, friends don't let friends drive Fords, but he was a friend long before he had a brain fart and having made the same mistake myself, I havn't held it against him.

    Having towed with all three, the Chevy still tows much better than either Ford. The Chevy has a smoother running engine and much better accessories, to include the on board diagnostics, autotrac 4X4, etc. etc.

    I agree with leathal02, all you Ford lovers have been focusing on the one so called advantage of torque that is really insignificant. There is MUCH MORE to being a better truck than a slightly higher torque at low rpm and if a lightl duty truck is used for what it is designed, that higher torque value is really not even missed on the Chevy. The Chevy has so many other things about it that make it a better truck, TO ME ANYWAY, that I never even considered the torque curve on paper to be relevent at all. I looked at all those figures long before buying my Chevy and I just did not feel that so called low end torque advantage that the Ford world keeps harping on.

    I agree again with leathal02 that actual driving experiences (again I have owned Ford and Chevy and towed with the 4.6l, the 5.4l Fords as well as Chevy 5.3l) are far more convincing to me than any paper specs. I know from driving and towing experience, in spite of so called torque disadvantages however significant or insignificant, the Chevy towed much better and is much better overall for what a 1/2 ton truck is used for.

    Another point is...If I really looked hard at torque and hp figures and that were the most important thing to me, the Chevy line DOES HAVE A MUCH BIGGER ENGINE, called the 6.0l or 360. Where is Ford's HD gas engine at? Ford's HD gas engine is non existent. Ford had this brainiac idea to put a light duty engine in their HD truck. Not everyone wants a diesel. What choice do Ford owners have for a HD truck if they don't want a diesel. That's right. NONE.

    Have a good day people. Teeeheee heee!
  • bigsnagbigsnag Member Posts: 394
    Oh, yeah, that's right Silverado vs. F-150. We're not talking about F-250 or other Super-Duty's.
    If you want to talk about the 6.0, you won't be talking about a half-ton, at least not yet. Until then, if you want real performance in a half-ton, look at the Lightning posts. Yeah, I have heard about the 6.0 maybe being offered in a half-ton, but it won't hang with a Lightning, not even according to Chevy's own numbers. Now I'm getting off on a tangent.

    Rocles,
    Thanks for the support. The funny thing is, they know we are right.
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    Yeah I'm sure all the manufacturers inflate their hp/torque numbers, or pretest a bunch of engines and then pick the best one. I don't think the government does any checking on this like they do for the CAFE. The only ones who might check are magazines?
    Anyway I'll get off this post. All I'm saying is that I've never had good luck with the 4 Fords (cars) I've owned, or were impressed with their power and fuel mileage. I'm picking up my Silverado in a couple of weeks, and trading in my '98 Camaro 3.8L V-6. 200 hp and it gets 35 mpg cruising at 75 - 80 (@2500rpm). That is a great engine for its size. I expect the Silverado will give me slightly less mileage (joke), but will be the best in class when looking at BOTH the power/mileage combo.
  • zbad71zbad71 Member Posts: 226
    No idiot would try and compare a real truck to a sports car. Your lightning is fast and I don't even care about its numbers or 1/4 miles times. That truck is USELESS for what a stock truck is designed for.

    If I wanted a sports car, I would buy a C5 Vette and blow your little lightnings doors off with ease! We are talkig real useful stock trucks.

    And, we don't know your right. Far from it. Thing is...you know your WRONG and can't handle it! Where is that HD truck gas engine???? Sure aint happening with a 5.4l.

    Have they finally resolved the piston slap in the 5.4l??? Whew, sure glad I am not one of those guy's!
  • smcpherrsmcpherr Member Posts: 114
    How is a Lightning useless as a truck? It still has a bed, doesn't it? It has more horsepower and torque than most stock trucks do, even heavy duties. I am fairly sure that it is built on a similar frame as the F-150, so it should have the same payload numbers. The suspension has been modified (lowered), brakes and transmission were beefed up, other than that, it is a truck. These days, a lot of people (myself included) buy pickups for more reasons than general construction and towing horse trailers. I drive a truck, but rarely do I use the 4wd or the bed. Does that mean I am an idiot? No, I may not often use the 4wd or the bed, but I like having them when I need them. Same thing goes for the Lightning. A truck can be built to go off road, tow trailers, haul dirt and carry people to where they have to go. Why can't they be built for speed? Those who order a Lightning may not have a need for the 4wd, and for them, the increased speed IS WHAT THEY WANT. Therefore, to those who get what they want, not what some magazine article says is the king of the road, congratulations on getting what you want. I hope you are happy with it. I'm very happy with my 4x4. And Zbad, I hope you are happy with your Silverado. Out of curious, Zbad, whats your view on the Silverado SS?
  • bigsnagbigsnag Member Posts: 394
    Where should I start? My point in the earlier post was that, this topic is about F-150 vs. Silverado. It is not a discussion about HD trucks. Hence my statement about 6.0 not offered in a half-ton. You're over here talking about the 6.0 is stronger than a 5.4. Well, it ought to be. Earlier you said Ford's V-10 is gutless. Somehow I doubt that the 6.0 (300 hp, 355 torque), will hang with the new V-10 (310 hp, 425 torque), especially since we know Chevy's history of inflated performance numbers. Whatever the case, this has nothing to do with the topic.

    Oh yeah, I almost forgot. Earlier you said the Ford you owned was a 4.6, yet you also said it developed the piston slap. 4.6's don't develop piston slap. That along with the chance of your single truck having all of the problems you listed, makes you the most unlucky guy in the history of the planet. You'd have had a better chance getting struck by a meteor.
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    Bigsnag
    So you think Chevy has a history of overrating their engines. Well thank God it isn't as bad or current as that 4.6L in the Cobra THAT HAS HAD PRODUCION HALTED BECAUSE THE PROBLEM IS SO BAD.
    What should I assume about the rest of their lineup. Isn't this the same basic engine block that becomes the 4.6 and 5.4 in the F-150's?

    The Silverado's engines come from the Corvette LS-1, and Ford doesn't build anything to compete with it.

    Why people buy?
    And as far as why do so many people buy the F-150? I suspect their is a lot of brand loyalty that carries over when Ford had a better design than Chevy or Dodge. I'm not foolish to claim Chevy has always been best, but since '99 they definitely are. Maybe Ford will regain the lead when they come out with their next redesign.

    To coninue with why some vehicles are popular, you have the same thing with Camry's and Accords. Most people are basically uneducated about vehicle technology and don't do months of research before picking something. They ask their neighbor, look in Consumer Reports, and say oh this was the best seller last year - it must be good. That is how a good many vehicles get sold.
  • bigsnagbigsnag Member Posts: 394
    It just looks kind of suspicious to me when dyno numbers at the rear wheel are significantly less than at the flywheel. This, and poor performance at the track, was the first real evidence to the fact that the Cobra's numbers were down. Yes, the Cobra has had some major problems this year, but what about the three years before that and countless other 4.6 engines in other models. Besides all of that, the Cobra engine is on the high end of performance, or at least it was supposed to be. If you have ever dealt with high performance motors, you know that even the smallest thing wrong will produce very significant losses in power.
    If you think that Chevy has not overrated the new pickup engines, then how can you explain repeated tests that show they don't produce near what is claimed. One such example: 64 lbs of torque and almost 80 hp less than advertised, at the rear wheels. This is not a typical loss, even if it is behind an automatic.
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    I already said I'm sure they all have overrated their engines. And I read magazine articles that quote various times, tests, and ratings.
    I am skeptical of many them though, because they don't sound very scientific. As I said before when doing an acceleration test it would be nice if the trucks had the same brand and size tire, and they said they were inflated the same. the same goes when testing brakes.
    For all I or you know about that dyno test (I believe it was Truck Trend?), they could have the Chevy in Autotrac sending power to the front. Or they may have just got a poor engine? A guy I work with gets about 25 mpg in his Honda Civic. On the highway in my V-6 Camaro I can get up to 35 mpg. He complained many times to Honda, and they just said there's a lot of differences in each engine.
    Anyway, I'll be happy with the 5.3. I drove a '99 and that had plenty of power. The 2000's are even better.
  • leathal02leathal02 Member Posts: 114
    for all you people who actually believe the damn ratings in the magazines....

    GO TEST DRIVE THE TRUCK AND SEE FOR YOURSELF!!!!

    If the chevy is so off in the recordings of the hp/tq #'s go drive one and you will see for yourself

    yeah, on the test the chevy's #'s werent as they say they were
    but if you look at the dodges and the ford they sure werent what ford says they are! they were off too!!!!!

    like someone else said too, there might have been a bad engine or somethin...not one of these are perfect, and shi! will happen

    and what can you do with a lightning..hmm .. drive it fast??lets see, too low to go over anything..if repair work is needed on the engine.. kinda hard to get into the engine as it is all crammed in there!!!

    have you ever seen one or those things?? DAMN!!!!they must have cut a hole in the side panel to get the supercharger in it or something??lol

    anyways, a real work truck is a truck bigger than a 1/2 ton...1/2 tons are play trucks! hehe

    If would be awesome to have the 6.0 liter in a 1/2 ton...it would compare to the dodge..displacement wise, lol


    like i have said and will always say..

    CHEVY MAKES THE GAS ENGINES

    ford makes the diesel. and dodge is somewhere in there
  • RoclesRocles Member Posts: 982
    35mpg in a Camaro? Riding downhill in neutral? Sure. And speaking of popular models, the Camry and Accord are well-built cars hence their sales figures. Not many products can continue to sell well if quality dives. Nice try though.....
    Let's face it; if kernick was right--who would want to buy a Ford? They are considered ugly and now apparently unreliable with weak engines. Boy with that rep, Ford should be losing 20% of sales since not everyone buys out of loyalty, right?
    Then again, kernick also wants us to believe his statement about the new "electric" Camaro he has. LOL!!! My wife has a Olds Intrigue with the 3.8L and I don't think she has ever seen better than 24mpg.

    ZBAD,
    What about this "piston slap" I keep hearing about? Should I use my rare but true story of one of my 95 Chevys with a cracked block? These incidents happen with all companies. The 5.4 is plenty engine for ANY half-ton. As for the HD models, alot of owners do want the diesel. Don't believe me? Okay, then explain why GM is desperate as hell to build a diesel that people won't laugh at? The Ford superduties BLOW Chevy away. Ford's only competition in that area is Dodge due to it's Cummins motors. When was the last time Chevy had a diesel that it could be proud to sell? 85?
    That Duramax won't save her anyway, by the time GM delivers, Ford and Dodge will already have made vast improvements to their motors to keep Chevy mired in third for HD trucks. That comment is what reinforces Chevy losers in thinking they know what HD buyers want. Not everyone wants a diesel? Yeah, explain that to guys that need them.
  • RoclesRocles Member Posts: 982
    First you ramble on about how the Lightning is worthless as a truck then you state that half-tons are "play" trucks. So what's the problem with the Lightning? You might want to actually read what you write before posting.
  • RoclesRocles Member Posts: 982
    Lethal,
    Can I tell my employees that drive in half-tons that they are really "playing" and not roofing? Boy! All of my employees will be fighting over the half-tons now! Those poor heavy-duties and stake bodies will be idle.....
  • brucec35brucec35 Member Posts: 246
    Just a hunch, but he might also want to see a dentist.
  • zbad71zbad71 Member Posts: 226
    "The suspension has been modified (lowered)"

    You can't haul anything with it, so why have a bed? Buy a sports car. A lowered truck has no more benefit than a car. Why even buy a truck if you actually want a car. That kind of garbage is why truck prices are so danged high.

    BTW: I have no more use for the Silverado SS than I would have for a Lightning. Waste of good money.
  • zbad71zbad71 Member Posts: 226
    I would really like to know where you are putting your head when you post!

    If you READ, not just see the words, BUT READ, my post, I started talking about HD trucks because you guy's kept touting some crap about 15-20 lbs torque advantage over Chevy. If you READ my post further, I also said that the torque advantage you are talking about is insignificant in a 1/2 ton truck. If you READ my post even further, you will see that I said IF TORQUE OR HP WAS WHAT WAS "THAT IMPORTANT" TO ME, I WOULD HAVE BOUGHT A HD TRUCK WITH THE 6.0l. There is far more to a truck than pure papermill marketing statistics and ploys to fool the crowd. Ford doesn't have a HD gas truck engine. You say Ford V10...HA HA HA HA HA! I laugh at your even thought that that joke of an engine could even compare to Chevy's 6.0l!!!!
    I don't give a rip what you say the numbers are in comparison. They must be way overrated. My dad, whipped as he is, bought one of those junkers for his wife to drive because she had always driven Fords. (That should have been his first hint not to marry her). I would ALMOST put my 5.3l up against it. That V10 is the biggest joke of any gas engine I have ever seen. Yeah, it has higher specs, with a 2 cylinder bigger displacement, it should. However, it lives nothing to what all the talk has been. The Chevy owners of the 6.0l have been running circles around it in real work and its a PIG on gas.
    You can keep your V10. There has not been a V10 produced that has proven to be an advantage over a good strong V8, including Dodges V10.

    Secondly, you show your ignorance of your own make of truck. The 4.6l DOES HAVE THE PISTON SLAP problem! Take a look out on www.f150online.com at some of the older posts. You will see tons of people that had the same problems. Mainly in the 98 models. There are not near as many as the 5.4l, but there are enough to prove it was not just my truck. Ford still hasn't helped any of those folks.

    Keep struggling, you may find a valid issue yet!
  • zbad71zbad71 Member Posts: 226
    Yes, piston slap.... in a 4.6l. Not highly documented but widely known none the less. Look out on some of the Ford truck owner sites. You will see the postings.

    Only a small percentage of HD truck buyers buy a diesel for personal use. Commercial maybe, but your taking the scope this topic way off course. I only ventured there to make the point that you Ford guy's claim of more torque and the such makes no difference. It is a very small number for a 1/2 ton truck and the Chevy's other features more than make up for this so called torque advantage anyway.

    I could care less about the diesel line up. I agree that Chevy has not had a decent diesel truck. Maybe the new Chevy diesel venture will not outshine the competition, may it will. I know either way, it has Ford and Dodge steppin and Fetchin to beat the product and be first to market. We'll see who wins when the time comes. Worht mentioning, nobody thought that the new Chevy would beat the new model Ford 1/2 tons, but they have...hands down.

    Even with Ford selling more trucks, GM is still a bigger company with more market share than Ford and Dodge put together (not just the trucks but autos included, i,e. Olds, Pontiac, Buick, Cadillac, etc.). Chevy is worth more dollars if they were to file bankrupt than Ford is being in the black and selling 100 times the amount of trucks each year!

    You Ford guy's are funny!
  • bigsnagbigsnag Member Posts: 394
    You are quite correct. There has been some reports of piston slap in the 4.6. I know this and I knew it when I posted my original comment. I was in such a hurry to point out how unlucky you are, that I forgot to type "as often as 5.4's" at the end of my sentence. Forgive me for the ommission.
    As for me searching for a point, how about you searching for all of these articles that show the 5.3 will outperform a 5.4. You haven't came up with any yet. As far as help from Ford. Yeah I guess Ford hasn't helped them. Replacing someone's engine free of cost, isn't helping in your book. If you care to look back at your posts, every one of them is pure opinion. No facts to back it up. Ford can't compare, Ford engines are dogs... Yadda Yadda Yadda.

    Everyone,
    If your interested in ZBad's unbiased remarks, you might want to check out the forums that contain discussions about the new Chevy trucks, like #626. Let him explain why he has had to do significant modifications to his truck to get it to run properly and about his bad experiences with Chevy customer service. He really shows his true colors. You might begin to think he hates all trucks and all customer service rep's.
  • lvstanglvstang Member Posts: 149
    Don't bother. I gave up on having intelligent conversation with Zdumb. He who never personally attacks and if he does he doensn't mean it. He who has the Ford posts memorized whenever there is a bad post but will never comment on the negative G.M. posts. He who only needs a half ton truck to pull only 4-5000 lbs. occasionally but a Lightning which is rated at 5000 lbs. towing is worthless. Seems when a Ford unquestionably kicks his chevy's butt it's worthless cause it can only haul 1000 lbs.(GEE, a true half ton!) He who quotes so many ignorant statistics but can never produce one or just says, "It's just my opionion" He who is actually given stats but discards them because magazines are biased.He who has this great info on how Fords over the years have all these quality problems and how G.M. is so superior in every way but he still buys a 98 Ford. Not too bright is he. I'm sort of getting the feeling Rocles doesn't believe Zdumb ever had a Ford and I agree. Anyway,I could go on but it's no use. The person's mind is made up. You're just beating your head against the wall.
  • lvstanglvstang Member Posts: 149
    Just read Z's posts on #626. 6 trips to the service dept. only $700 to get his chevy to run without pinging. Oh sorry, he fixed it with Texaco gas. Man, I can't even imagine what would he would ramble on about if this had been a Ford problem. What a hypocrite.Those poor chevy servie writers.
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    I usually listen with some respect to your opinions, as it sounds like you've owned quite a few trucks. Maybe with all the BS you see around you doubt everyone's experiences - but what's so unbelieveable about getting 35 mpg in a car rated 30 mpg highway? That was both ways on a trip from New Hampshire to Western PA.
    Now not to get further off-topic (the brands are off-topic, but not the general point of how people pick cars), Honda and Toyota have good quality. For a number of years it was excellent compared to what Detroit was putting out in the 80's. There are a lot of people who only know how to put gas in their car, and that when it's time to go shopping "Toyota and Honda have good quality". So like my mother they go buy a Honda Accord. She doesn't realize that yes there are cars out there that handle, brake, and accelerate better. Now I believe trucks have the most brand loyalty - how many people out there go buy a Ford because Dad had one, or because it's the #1 seller? The mass of these people want to be done shopping in 1 day, pick a nice color, and go back to their everyday life. If the dealer treats them nice, gives them some hotdogs, and gives them a "good" deal, they buy whatever the rest of the sheep are buying.
    Now I'm sure Ford and Chevy have alternated over the years as to who has had the best designed truck. The sales of these 2 if you count Ford vs the combined GMC/Chevy, has been neck-and-neck for many years? I've considered Chevy, Ford, Dodge, and Toyota designs in selecting a truck. Right now GM has the best OVERALL design, point after point. When Ford had it's last redesign it probably was superior. When Ford does a major redesign, I would expect it to be superior. But if you want to talk now, Ford is 2nd (at least in the lightduty 1500 and 2500 sries). Just be happy you aren't dumb enough to have been supporting Dodge and that quality fiasco.
  • zbad71zbad71 Member Posts: 226
    Your problem is that you read, but you don't "READ" or maybe you just aren't very quick to understand things.

    If you read my posts, you will know that I have driven mainly Ford trucks for the last 15 years. I never really considered myself "loyal" to Ford, but I NEVER HAD "ANY" PROBLEMS WITH THEM IN 15 YEARS! I DID however say that after buying a VERY LAME 98 Ford, I did a little research and found that by documented recalls and service bulletins from present to previous 10 years, Ford had more of both of them and they were more severe problems than Chevy. End of that point

    Secondyly, I have never claimed sole loyalty to Chevrolet. I HAVE had a few problems with my Chevy and JUST LIKE FORD AND DODGE, I have had some resistance from "MY" dealer, not "ALL" Chevy dealers to rectify. That is something you will find in "ALL" makes. However, along with that, the few problems myself and other Chevy owners have had, are extremely minor problems that should be expected in a new model truck. These "problems" should be more on the line of "inconveniences or annoyances", not "problems"
    Piston slap, transmission and transfer case gring, steering boxes and pitman arms going out, twitchy steering and inability to keep alignment, etc. etc. etc. are not what I would consider an "inconvenience or annoyance".

    Thirdly, I never quoted any "statistics" about anything. Again, somewhere you are not "understanding". My comments as well as yours have ALL been opinion based. Even your so called facts from Ford Dork magazine, etc. with all these tests that so-called "prove" the Chevy was inferior in this test or that, are all pure biased tests or opinion.

    Fourth, I am glad that Ford has finally stepped up and decided to "help" these people with the piston slap problems. I am sure it is a result of their high customer focus and just plain good heart efforts! I mean, they only denied the problem and pushed it under the rug until it became so widely spread that they couldn't hide it anymore. Now they are the "good guy's" because they are finally doing what they should have done from day one! And.... how many of those people that are finally getting some relief had to write everybody up the line and spend hours on the phone and go through this step and that step of arbitration to get that relief. I personally know of several and they STILL have not been notified that THEIR trucks will be fixed. They have gotten the B.S. letter about how its being looked into and when a course of action is determined they will be notified....blah blah blah.

    I won't deny that MY selling dealer is not very good. I have had to take my truck to them several times for only minor problems. I could care less what you "think" you have caught me in where I have posted other problems with my Chevy. I never said that Chevy or my truck was flawless. There is not a vehicle made that isn't. Human error is involved with all of them.
    However, the minor problems I have had, very minor, and "COMPLETELY RECTIFIED" I might add, are NOTHING in comparison to the pos Ford I owned!
    Even if Ford had fixed ALL the problems it had (which they didn't), the truck was still a gutless pig.

    I have never claimed to be a loyal Chevy person and more than once have said here that if Ford builds a better truck, I will have no problem buying one. None of my posts have been exclusively to Chevy being better than Ford. My posts have identified "MY OPINION" of why the "SILVERADO" is better than the "F150". Period.

    Now quit your crying!
  • zbad71zbad71 Member Posts: 226
    "Right nowGM has the best OVERALL design, point after point."

    This could not have been said better ...."OVERALL"

    All these Ford guy's keep going to 1 point about torque advantages or quicker 1/4 mile times, crapola, crapola, yadda, yaddda, blah, blah blah.

    Apparently, safety facts, reliability, customer service, and technology are not of concern to these guy's.

    These guy's overlook things like Ford still using 4 bolt main bearing caps to Chevy's 6 bolt crossing linked bearing caps; Autotrac 4X4, more suspension options, more interior room, better braking, less squat when towing, smoother acceleration, etc. etc. etc. I could go on and on.

    These guys keep going to the same two points #1 more torque, which ALL us Chevy owners have deemed not only negligible but really not a significant reason to buy a Ford over Chevy #2 Ford sells more trucks than Chevy.

    Ford may sell more trucks, but the same statistics used to determine that Ford sells more trucks, shows that there are more 10 year and older Chevy's on the road than Ford. This proves which trucks last longer and stay in running service longer.

    These Ford guy's are a riot with how personal they take this stuff. They must place all their confidence and self worth in their Ford trucks.
  • smcpherrsmcpherr Member Posts: 114
    Z - you never answered me as to your opinion on the Silverado SS.

    Also, you think lowering a truck causes it to be worthless? Why buy a lowered truck, you can't haul anything, right? Well, I spent most of the last five years in LA. Do you know how many trucks I have seen there that have been lowered? Most of them have been Chevys. Matter of fact, a friend of mine owns a Chevy crew cab dually that has been lowered. Also has a 454 and a hell of a lot of performance modifications. Do you want my opinion on how stupid that looks? But, you know why he did it? HE WANTED IT! The last few years I have seen a lot of the new model F-150s that have been lowered and sped up. So there is obviously a market for lowered, fast trucks. A lot of people like 'em, so kudos to Ford for making a stock lowered truck thats faster 'n heck. I haven't seen a Silverado SS, but I hear they are going to be the same idea as the Lightning. Kudos to them to. Who cares if you can't very well carry two hundred cinder blocks to a construction site that is accessible only through a fifty mile offroad mountain pass, most people who buy trucks will never have to do that. Regardless of how hard you try, you will never be able to load twenty boxes of clothes and a dinner table into the back end of a Camaro. It may be tough, but you might be able to do it in a truck. Even a lowered truck. So, don't you think its acceptable to have a vehicle that may not have the full function of a super duty pickup nor the full speed of the Corvette, but does have a mild mix of both? I think it is.
  • zbad71zbad71 Member Posts: 226
    Here is a post I made on 15 Sept in regard to the minor problem I have had with my Silverado.
    NOTE: The problem was "fixed" unlike the Ford I had and I am completely happy with my Silverado



    I ditto that. I am a 15 year Ford truck owner
    that bought a 98 Ford XLT F150 4x4 Ext cab, yada
    yada, yada.

    There is not enough disk space available to put
    down here all the problems it had. I have always
    owned GM cars and had excellent quality and
    performance from them. I traded that 98 Ford after
    4 months and bought the 99 Z71.

    I have had a few minor problems, the worst being
    the ping on "some" brands of 87 octane gas. I have
    switched to Texaco 87 octane gas and have no
    problems with this truck.

    The new model Fords just went South. I won't buy
    one until they get a better gas engine for them
    among some other minor things.

    Don't know "too" much about the Dodge, but the
    consistant problems I hear are....transmission,
    brakes, anemic engines for size trucks, and poor
    gas mileage. That sounds familiar of the Fords to
    me. tee heee heee!
  • zbad71zbad71 Member Posts: 226
    I did respond to your inquiry of my opinion of the SS Silverado. I think it is as much a waste of money as the Lightning.

    I don't think a lowered truck serves any real purpose. If you need a truck to haul "anything", buy a truck, not a car. If you buy a truck and then take away all the benefits that a truck has over a car, you should have bought a car to begin with. It may be a lot of peoples preference to do that, but it is not what a truck was designed to do.

    Lowering trucks and what not is a fad thing that "kids" started to be cool and different. All it has done is taken the car buying crowd and moved them to buy trucks, driving up the demand for trucks, driving up the cost of trucks. It has the same principle as some yuppie spending 40-50 grand on a Lincoln Navigator or a Cadillac's SUV. What a waste. Who will ever take a vehicle like that off road to go camping or to a remote fishing spot, etc. SUV's were built to go off road and still carry passengers more than cargo to get places a car wouldn't.

    The stupidity of peoples' "wants" has driven the truck prices to unreasonable highs.

    If you want to drive a car, buy a car. If you want to go off road, buy a truck or SUV and use it for that purpose.

    A vehicle should be purchased for its intended purpose, not to be part of some yuppie or high school fad.
  • smcpherrsmcpherr Member Posts: 114
    I still disagree. I think people buying vehicles for other than the designed purpose has been very beneficial to people who drive trucks. Take a look at the trucks made in the 80's and the trucks made today. Now, tell me there is no significant improvement. My first vehicle, a Chevy 4x4, had a very poor ride. On long distance trips you'd have to get out every few hours to stretch. Several times I had to make a stop, not to eat, get gas or go to the bathroom, but because it hurt sitting in that thing. That truck was designed for your "intended purposes." Now I drive a new model truck. I just recently drove from Wisconsin to Nebraska, a nine hour drive. The only time I had to stop was for gas, food and bathroom breaks. I drove from Beloit, WI, to Des Moines, Iowa, approx 370 miles, non-stop. When I got out, I didn't feel like I had just been through a heavyweight boxing bout. I felt the same as I did when I first got in the truck.

    The gauges are positioned better, the ergonomics of the interior is far superior, the road noise is reduced, the stereo sounds better and the seats are more comfortable. No offense to those of you who use the truck for its "intended purpose," but do you really think if construction workers were the only ones who purchased trucks these improvements would have been made? I really don't think so. I don't mind paying more money to have a driveable vehicle.

    Oh, and sorry I didn't see your post about the SS, I must have missed it. I wouldn't buy one either, nor would I buy a Harley Ford, but I don't mind having them available.
  • bigsnagbigsnag Member Posts: 394
    Zbad,
    The following are direct quotes from some of your posts about you new Chevy. Minor, you say.

    Enjoy Everyone:

    "My fix was somewhat expensive but well worth it in my opinion as the dealer would not help me much. I bought the Hypertech PPIII programmer and have not had any problems since.

    "For $350.00, my problem was rectified. That is well worth my time and hassle getting the poor customer service from GM to resolve it. I took it in 6 times. 6 times I was told "its normal, they all do it, and there is no fix for it". That was AFTER the flash update of my computer.

    "I also, per Quadrunner 500's advice initially
    "modified" my thermostat to open sooner. I now
    have the 160 degree thermostat from Hypertech.

    "My previous post indicated that I had resolved the
    pinging in my 99 5.3l with the aftermarket HPPIII
    programmer. It had since started pinging again so
    I went back to stock programming.

    "Also, I know that the heat soak on these Vortec
    engines is causing much of the ping probability. I have found that the bigger radiator that goes in
    the HD 6.0l trucks will also fit in the mounts for
    the 5.3l. Priced from GM under $350.00, guess what is going in my 5.3l Silverado before next Spring?
    "I am also going to install a pusher fan set up to
    help push air through the radiator."

    Even one of your Chevy buddies said that all of this seemed like a lot of work.

    Lvstang,
    You're right. Any attempt at a reasonable, objective conversation with Zbad is futile. Later.
  • zbad71zbad71 Member Posts: 226
    Again, either you don't really read the posts or you don't have the capacity to understand what you read.

    I said before, but apparently I have to say again, that the GM service I refer to is MY SELLING DEALER. Are you autistic or what? One dealer does not make for a bad product. I can name PLENTY of piss poor Ford dealers, but that doesn't make a bad product. The poor quality of the Ford vehicle rests aside from dealer service.

    If you READ my post, you would have read, but again, I will repeat myself for the IQ challenged, the VERY MINOR "annoyance" I had from my Silverado is RECTIFIED! Did you understand that. It is no longer an issue! It was very minor and yes, MY DEALER was not any help because it WAS such a minor problem.

    Even if the problems you present with the Silverado were a major issue (which they are not), I would still buy the Silverado over the Ford who has a much longer list of "REAL PROBLEMS" that is much to long to detail here, anemic engine lines, poor steering assy's, transmissions that go out early in every line of truck they make to include the Explunger and Exposition, no autotrac 4X4, no on-board computer diagnostics, fewer suspension options, no HD gas engine line that is worth a crap, slower braking ability, less interior room, less standard equipment, less options available, 10% LESS RESALE VALUE, cheesy swoopy Taurus look-alike exterior, poor oil filter location, no drain plug for the transmission oil pan, pain in the butt access to the rear diff plug, less rigid main bolt caps, less rigid cranks and upper end components, lower volume oil lubrication, umpteen zillion wire slices vs Chevy's whopping 8 wire splices, old style steel frame vs. Chevy's new stronger than any competition molded frame.
    I could keep going on and on showing the inferiorities of Fords to Chevy's. You all come up with two advantages, one is not even important (a supposed torque advantage) and the other is not relevent at all (Ford sells more trucks).

    Come up with something convincing. Tell us what makes your Ford so much better. It is clear to all us Chevy owners that the technology resides in the Chevy truck. All Ford did was change the body style and use a different engine. Where is the technology? The Triton engine design is a CAR engine (over head cam). The pushrod engine is notorious for being a more powerful and durable engine for what a truck is used for.

    Give it up, you have NOTHING over the Chevy. If you feel you do, TELL US WHERE ALL THIS TECHNOLOGY IS AT. WHAT GREAT SIGNIFICANT ADVANTAGE DOES FORD BRING TO THE TABLE THAT HASN'T BEEN DONE BEFORE? Even the four door option was first designed from Dodge. Ford has been a follower and just plain lost to Chevy in Innovative design with the 99 Silverado and you Ford guy's just can't hang with it.
  • lvstanglvstang Member Posts: 149
    Let's see: anemic engines. If a 5.4 outperforms a 5.3 what does that make a 5.3? Underanemic? If autotrac is so wonderful you should of bought a jeep, they have had a similar system long before G.M. If the Ford indeed has "only" four bolt mains(I only question this because my 97 Cobra has 6 bolt mains so I'm not positive about the truck motors) Then I guess all those 4 bolt small block chevys of the past are rigidly under engineered. I guess the chevy has a cryptonite crankshaft because Zbads comment that the Ford's forged steel crank is less rigid must be true, after all it is opinion/fact if he said it. Ditto for the Ford's forged pistons. By the way, forged pistons normally have to have looser clearances than cast pistons hence the piston slap. Even though piston slap is unacceptable tighter clearances should fix the problem.On board diagnostics? What does he mean? Fords don't plug in at the dealer's star system? Or is this something he just mis read in the chevy bible I mean sales brochure.Seems there is a fix for chevy frames that crack at the steering box in most offroad magazine's ad sections so I guess they had to beef up the frame. Ford's frames don't crack. I guess all the posts on dangerous wheel shimmy, squeaks and rattles, leaking rear main seals, engine replacements and lemon law buy backs on the G.M. trucks are just minor annoyances. Zbad hates the swoopy Taurus styling on the F-150 but he supposedly bought one.Electrical splices on the frame? Who cares? Are you a body shop man or plan on wrecking your brand new truck? There's no advantage I can think of that concerns me with regard to electrical splices. Seems like you're really stretching on that one. The E4od transmission is the same trans that was in the earlier Ford products with trailer tow and 5.8 and up motors no problem with mine towing 5000 lbs. plus in the Nevada heat. Even after all Zbads psycho babble I still am impressed with theG.M. products. There just isn't the gap he states there is in the execution of the two brands. Just drive 'em and buy the one you like best. Zbad are you a woman? That tee hee heee you do sure is feminine. Just wondering.
  • zbad71zbad71 Member Posts: 226
    Ford DOES use the SVT; and if you don't want the
    sticker on your truck, you have one VERY simple
    thing to do. This will also save you about
    $17K-$20K. Just don't buy the truck. It would
    solve all your problems. You would not have to
    worry about having a sticker on your "fine
    vehicle", and I would not have to sit here and read
    your crap.
    It is extremely hard to believe this, but I still
    have nothing against that TRD sticker on the truck
    - even after you have enlightened me so greatly.
    But LV, thanks for the advice. I'll make sure that
    I take ALL your advice into consideration when I
    buy my next vehicle.
  • lvstanglvstang Member Posts: 149
    From your usual heated response I gather the truth must really hurt. Good intelligent come back however on the Mommy Daddy thing.Please learn how to use apostrophes in their correct possessive or plural form. It's really getting annoying that a six figure educated x-crew chief is illiterate. Oh I forget he's a chevy owner; that explains it. Way off on the demagraphics.I have some cheese to go along with that whine you big cry baby.I got to go now, it seems my truck is on fire due to some wire splice thing....
  • lvstanglvstang Member Posts: 149
    You and the Toyota owner have a lot in common, you're both hot headed babys.(see, no apostrophe)All I had said in that post was I thought "TuRD" looked funny on the side of Toyota trucks.As your usual practice you only tell one side of the story.Now shoo fly. You're a little,little man(man?)
  • lvstanglvstang Member Posts: 149
    Please stop you'll make him cry. Right now he's trying to dial 911 to report us but he forgot the number.
This discussion has been closed.