By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Bob
-Dave
Bob
If you put the same IRS that is in the Expedition in an F150 it will have major mechanical breakdowns if it's used day in-day out for loading up heavy loades etc, towing landscaping equipment etc.
-mike
http://www.autoshowny.com/
I will be out of town most of that week, returning late on Wed the 23rd. Any thoughts about getting together say Friday the 25th for a full day of fun and frolic??? The weekend days are very crowded.
Steve
-mike
I'm a fan of the IRS on the Expedition. Let's face it, these are glorified family haulers, and that's just fine with owners. The ride was truly impressive for such a large truck, and the 3rd row is the best in any SUV that I've sampled.
But passengers aren't sitting above the rear axle on a pickup, so the ride isn't as important and the space savings for the footwell are not even relevant. So yeah, it's a tough sell. Ford is being smart in its conservative approach.
-juice
I'm sure IRS will first appear in play trucks, then eventually work its way into more serious haulers. I bet the upcoming Honda Pilot-based pickup will be the first, if you discount the Baja.
I don't think IRS will ever replace solid axles in pickups, but I do think there is a place for them, especially as more and more become personal use vehicles—which is what most full-size 1/2 tons have become.
Bob
I have odd opinions when it comes to pickups and SUVs, skewed more towards the utility and ease of maintenance than the everyday transportation mode. Have to chew on it a little before I spout them though.
Ed
Steve
-mike
Pretty soon the work truck will be extinct.
-juice
-mike
As more and more pickups become the sole family vehicle, or are viewed as personal use vehicles, I see the need. Look at all the new crew-cab 1/2 tons on the market today. Three years ago there were none! Today, they're all over the place. By and large, these have replaced the family station wagon and/or SUV.
So, what's wrong with having a pickup that can have a ride that's close to that of a car? For these customers, they'll get the both of best worlds. It will ride like a car, and still be able to do all the work they also require.
Bob
Bob
Yeah go ahead and make it an option, but it would probably be an expensive option since they won't be able to just churn out SRAs.
-mike
-mike
As to contractors passing on the increased costs, they're already doing that when they buy top trim level HD pickups—which I see a lot of, BTW.
1/2 ton diesels? Again, a decision that is market driven. They are coming BTW. So, in the not too distant future, a 1/2 ton truck owner/contractor can purchase a $4K+ diesel engine—who will in turn, pass that increased diesel engine cost on to their unsuspecting customers.
Bob
I noticed that some cars tend to have rear wheels sort of spread out at some angle:
/ \ instead of | |
examples: BMW X5 (very pronounced), some other BMWs, lowered Civics, many old Americans (Buicks, Olds, Fords).
More rare, some cars have wheels sort of very slightly turned in:
\ / instead of | |
My old Loyale had that, and many Pathfinders seem to have the same pattern. It's never as pronounced as the "out" example.
I've never noticed "in" or "out" pattern on front wheels.
My question is: is this normal, to have rear wheels "in" or "out" at some angle? Doesn't it cause a premature wear on tire and chassis?
If we are going to play the "market drives everything" then I guess there has been no need for turbos in the foresters that we scream about so loudly on here...
-mike
Where's this logic come from? Are you saying that only people here at Edmunds want a Forester turbo?
There's obviously a market for the Forester turbo, or Subaru wouldn't be building one.
As to justifying diesel pickups: Yeah, if those owners keep those trucks 2 – 3 times longer than those who own gas pickups. I've never seen any evidence to show that to be the case, however. So, I'm not so sure those diesel owners do recoup their $4+K investment. I'm sure some do, but I bet there are a lot who don't.
Bob
As for evidence? It's a known fact that diesel trucks run for 300K-400K miles w/o major rebuilds, which even the best gas engines can't compete for longevity and fuel milage.
My point about the turbo foresters is that there hasn't been a need til now or else the "market" would have driven them to build one by now.
-mike
As for evidence? It's a known fact that diesel trucks run for 300K-400K miles w/o major rebuilds, which even the best gas engines can't compete for longevity and fuel milage. >>
True, but the guy who *originally* bought the brand new vehicle, unless he kept it for many years, may not recoup that investment. A lot of these people, regardless of what engine they have, buy new vehicles every 3 – 4 years, and may have well under 100K on them when they trade. Those people lose money when they buy a diesel. Not every diesel customer is a smart consumer.
<< My point about the turbo foresters is that there hasn't been a need til now or else the "market" would have driven them to build one by now. >>
Market tastes change, for any number of reasons.
Bob
Contrair. Re-sale value on a Diesel is higher than that of a gas engined vehicle of the same stds.
Below is a perfect example... Nearly DOUBLE the trade in value.
1990 Dodge Ram Pickup, Long Bed, 2wd, 100k miles
Trade-In Value $3,105 6cylinder Turbo Diesel
Trade-In Value $1,500 5.2l V8 Gas
Trade-In Value $1,615 5.9l V8 Gas
Trade-In Value $1,150 3.9l V6 Gas
-mike
I cracked up when I read your post since I also notice the same things!
What you're noticing are different camber settings on wheels. A / \ setting is a negative camber while the opposite \ / is positive.
Negative cambers improve cornering and stability while positive cambers help offset heavy loads (picture the \ / getting squashed down to a | |)and improves turn in.
Here's a great link explaining all the wheel alignment settings:
http://www.familycar.com/alignment.htm
It's hard to tell just from looking at a vehicle if the settings are from the factory vs. user modified. I often see a lot of boy-racer Civics with very pronounced positive camber. The downside to any extreme alignment will be premature tire wear.
Hope that helps,
Ken
I'm surprised the compact trucks don't go IRS first. They pull smaller loads.
My ex-roommate runs a fleet of trucks with his company. He said they routinely get 250k miles from a gas engine, but with 1 rebuild required. Diesels get 300k without a rebuild, and often it's the body that is falling apart, while the engine is still kicking. It's amazing. Plus they save about 40% in fuel costs.
-juice
Mitsu Tarmac Spyder: OK, it's over-done, but the Lancer is so under-done. I say tone it down just a little and go ahead and build it. This is the type of car that could replace my Miata. Give it AWD please, and I don't necessarily need 315hp, I'd be happy with 200+.
Pontiac G6: looks nice, but what about rear headroom? Sort of looks like Chrysler's cab forward designs, too.
Zook Concept S: I can see this going up against the Mini Cooper. It's kind of cute, no?
Yoda FJ Cruiser: hideous, it's half way between the Element and the Aztec, leaning towards the latter. While I'd like to see them make a Wrangler competitor, this ain't it.
-juice
It's known Toyota is going to offer an Xterra-fighter, and it's been said that the FJ Cruiser is a hint of what that vehicle might be. Like the Xterra, it's built off the small pickup chassis; in this case, the Tacoma.
I rather like it.
Bob
Factor into that diesel engines last twice as long as gas engines and require less maintenance,and you can see why they are so popular in Europe.
Unfortunately there are downsides not the least of which is performance, for the likes of Paisan who drives boot to the tin all the time a diesel takes about a week to get zero to sixty LOL. merging into traffic and overtaking takes lots of planning
Having said that over there anyway you could'nt give a gas car away, they are becoming an endangered species.there will always be performance vehicles of course but for the mainstream, diesels rule.
Cheers Pat.
But for hauling Diesel is the way to go. My next truck will hopefully be diesel. Right now I'm thining a used Excursion or a Diesel Pickup.
-mike
Bob
Bob
I have driven his last one a couple years ago when I was home and it took some getting used to.
Cheers Pat.
Cheers Pat.
Me: "I have odd opinions when it comes to pickups and SUVs, skewed more towards the utility and ease of maintenance than the everyday transportation mode. Have to chew on it a little before I spout them though."
juice: "Pretty soon the work truck will be extinct."
Bob: "As more and more pickups become the sole family vehicle, or are viewed as personal use vehicles, I see the need."
juice: "I agree that real truck customers will soon have to go to HD versions to get what they want. But if the volume is shifting towards casual use trucks, theyre just fulfilling a need, so we cant blame em."
I think my ideas on pickups and SUVs more closely resemble paisan's. I grew up in the country, where pickups made up - still do - the majority of vehicles. These were farm vehicles but often also the sole vehicle in the household. In one of my early college summer jobs, I drove 1/2-ton and 3/4-ton pickups as well as heavier trucks. These were "work trucks" as you all describe them. In my mind pickup trucks shouldn't have carpeting or cloth seats, much less leather - you should be able to open the doors and hose out the cab. If someone says "pickup" to me my mind's eye draws a Ford, Chevy, Dodge, IH or Studebaker stepside, usually dark green.
If you say "SUV" it will draw the original Ford Bronco or an IH Scout. Maybe a Chevy K5 Blazer. Get crazy and draw a Toyota FJ40 or Land Rover, but only if I've been watching "Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom." I always thought of SUVs as pickups with an enclosed bed. These vehicles were driven by architects and construction foremen, surveyors, agricultral extension agents, public utility line inspectors, and the US Forest Service. People who would otherwise drive a pickup but for the fact they may have equipment that requires protection from the elements. Maybe an occasional passenger or two. Most of the things people now claim they need SUVs to do were done with large station wagons.
Crew cab pickups were a hybrid between the two: work trucks with space for additional passengers. I can only picture them being driven by construction crews or railroad employees - the latter sometimes outfitted with train wheels so that they could ride the rails as well as the roads.
Now we live in an age where pickups and SUVs are the sole family personal use vehicles. The market demands that creature comforts and luxury features be incorporated into those vehicles which were once the sole province of automobiles. I won't touch on the higher profit margins vehicle manufacturers make on light duty trucks cf. automobiles, but that is a factor as well.
Another is the concept of "aspirational purchases." I no longer live in the country. I do not have to work on a farm; I am a desk jockey. Yet in the back of my mind I would like to believe that, if I had to, I could go back to a farm and live that agrarian life. Buying a pickup then would make a statement to myself to that end. I'm not sure I put that in the most accurate words, but what I'm trying to say is that people make purchases, especially of high-priced, highly visible items like vehicles, not so much based on their needs but on what that purchase says about the purchaser.
I've gone on long enough and probably given you more of a glimpse into my psyche and less of a commentary on what people want in their light trucks than you wanted.
Ed
Greg
Bob
-mike
-mike
Talk about supreme irony: Mike wanting a Ford, and me criticizing a Ford!
* = Are you aware that the small Ford Aerostar (panel version), and the Chevy 1/2 ton Suburban both have higher payload ratings than the 3/4 ton Excursion! It's true.
Bob
-mike
Actually Kate, contrary to popular opinion, I've never been a HUGE fan of Fords. However, my experience with that brand, which is considerable, has never been anywhere near as bad as Mike often likes to portray it.
OK, I'm off the soapbox now...
Bob
My perception is that Ford & Chevy are mainstreaming their truck lines, trying to appeal to suburbanites & not just haulers/workers/farmers etc. Dodge still seems to be touting their "heavy-duty" status, maybe with the hopes of catching the market that the other two are distancing themselves from.
Cheers! (but no diesels in my driveway)
Paul
Greg
The Avalanche has got to be the butt-ugliest, most-overdone contraption I've ever laid eyes on...
Yuck. Makes the Aztec/Rendevous look positively appealing, and the Baja, well, dignified.
Apologies to all the Avalanche fans out there, but you couldn't give me one of those paid for and gift wrapped with a year's supply of gas.
-brianV
Bob
My dad's neighbor (who's also my friend) has an Avalanche and loves it. My dad loves it, too. Those things are versatile. Lutz just de-cladded them, too.
-juice
Greg