Current pickup truck trends

erikheiker · December 2001

In Alaska the truck is king. Almost everyone I know has at least one. To not have a truck here is to limit what you do and where you go. While I would have liked to have and ext cab and an 8 ft bed, I knew it was too impractical for every day driving in an urban environment. So I gave up the back seat. I have filled the back up a number of times...something that would have required two trips with a 6.5 ft bed. When I take trips in the summer, the back becomes my home, since I don't like hauling anything behind me or having a camper I wouldn't get a whole lot of use out of. An 8 ft bed is much roomier for someone who's 6' 2", than a 6.5 ft bed is. But I do have to wonder how much longer regular cab long beds will be available in consumer trim. It works for me, but I don't see many others like it on the road. And I can park it in my garage...something I couldn't do with even with a short bed ext cab. It sure is nice to have a clean warm truck right after a big snowfall!

moparmad · December 2001

I still don't see any post blaming all the truck problems of the world on Toyota. I would think you would take it as a compliment that anyone who said that thinks Toyota has that much influence on the history of trucks.
Don't mean to cause trouble but as an outsider looking in I see the Toyota guys doing all the name calling and complaining not the Chevy guys. Maybe you should try to look objectively at what you are writing,maybe you are not meaning to come across as you do.
I have been a Steelers fan for most of my life but I am not going to tell a Rams fan that the Rams stink,they don't. I think it is similar with trucks,they are all good,so to argue which is best is simply a waste of words.

plutonious · December 2001

"as an outsider looking in" you probably didn't witness the mountain-load of garbage posts by midnight_stang and quadrunner500 that they themselves deleted after keeping them on-line for a while. They just love to stir up trouble and raise a ruckus here and especially in our Tacoma threads, then delete their incendiary posts and call us trolls. Clever tactic, huh? Too bad you didn't see midnight_stang's posts, they were "XXX-rated!"

txyank1 · December 2001

of these post are more just to illicit a response than offer anything constructive. And are best ignored. Seems to go from one board to another. Miissed the ones last night. Darn.

chevytruck_fan · December 2001

Anyone notice Bama's reasons for a shortbed fit perfectly the idea of a driveway queen truck, hmmm exactly what the tundra was designed for, sititing in the driveway.

plutonious · December 2001

The Lincoln Blackwood, GMC Denali, Cadillac Escalade, etc. would be much better, and more expensive, examples of shiny yuppie-mobiles that look good in a driveway. Better yet, why don't you use obyone's chevy as an example? I bet that big, pretty shiny truck looks real nice sitting on top the dealership's hydraulic lift going on 5 months.

Dude, you really need to quit living such a sheltered and isolated existence out there in those wheatfields in Ellensburg. FYI, people do ACTUALLY LIVE IN CITIES where driving a monstrous F-350 dually would not only be impractical but dangerous. No parking spaces big enough, can't make U-turns on the roads, can't park the truck in your garage or maybe even in the crowded streets, etc. Yet a lot of folks in the city want and need a truck for hauling boats, construction projects, moving, etc. Do yourself a favor and go to Seattle and see what people drive over there and why. Might open your eyes a little...

Now, I'm not saying Tundras are for city-slickers. I'm saying that you should choose a truck that fits your needs. Sometimes, I get scoffed at by the guys in the diesel F-350s when I'm in my Tacoma. BUT, for my purposes, a diesel F-350 is totally worthless. First, I would hate to try and maneuver that thing on the narrow streets in Mexico when I'm there (about 75% of the time). The truck is extremely heavy (especially with that diesel engine block) and has relatively small tires, and this makes for an extremely poor off-road vehicle. These trucks simply get stuck much easier than something like a Tacoma due to their weight, small tires and sinking tendencies. I LOVE to hunt, and I'd be a fool taking a truck like that out in the muck down here. The hunters using the big diesel Fords and Chevys use them simply to haul all their un-necessary junk, including four-wheelers, which they ride through the brush. Heck, I just take my truck and my rifle...

I have a lot more respect for guys who buy according to their needs and USE their trucks. I hate to say it, but A LOT (not all) of the Ford and Chevy guys are buying the biggest trucks they can afford because they're on an ego-trip. This is why trucks are getting so expensive - everybody's buying them! It's usually these ego-guys with the big trucks they don't use that give me lip about my Tacoma. The guys that do use their trucks, however, usually give me a respectful nod when they see even my Tacoma when it's all muddy as heck and I've got a big gutted buck or javelina in the back dripping blood all over the place.

So don't laugh too hard at the folks in the Tundras and Tacomas. Many of these guys might actually be working their trucks harder than the posers in the big-rigs.

kg11 · December 2001

Bamma's reasons make sense to me.I have a Sierra 2500HD that I use for towing a 7000 ib boat.In the 8 months I've owned it I've hualed over 3000 lb of bricks or concrete at a time 6 or 7 times,and on the rack I've carried 16 foot tube steel columns.I park it in the garage.The tundra wouldn't work for me ,but if I needed a light duty truck that isn't much bigger inside than my tacoma std cab 4x4 and a smooth ride I might give Tundra a try.Even if it is too big for off road.

hunter98 · December 2001

I have a 2002 GMC 2500 HD Ext Cab SB 4x4 Duramax/Allison/Eaton in my WARM garage and need the capabilities of the truck for the farm, and yes the shortest bed I would by for Farm use is the current SB.

I feel that the 8 ft beds can be wonderful, and are very important. Some of the places that I have to park, barely fit a SB. Dad has a 94 Ext Cab LB 4x4 3/4 ton anyways. I think that GM should offer two more bed sizes on their trucks. I feel that an 120" bed should be offered on the Reg and Ext cab 2500HD and 3500 trucks. This would be a very useful option for many farmers, contractors and other tradesmen. That gives you 8 feet behind your tool box, and 10 feet below it for lumber (great for contractors).

The current SB is a 78.7" bed, the LB is 97.6", I think that a 64.5" and a 121.6" beds should be added on the proper models. I think that the 1500HD should have an optional 64.5" bed, which would make it only 223.1" long, with a 142.5" wheelbase. This would allow use of the close enough 143.5" frame for cost savings. The truck would be virtually the same length as the current Ext Cab SB, and I feel would be an excellent option for many buyers who want a GM CC, but not the avalanche. This truck would fit their needs, be cheaper, nice looking and fit in their garage. I think the 1500 Ext Cab should get the 64.5" bed option as well. This would allow it to use the RC LB frame of 133", so have the same turning radius, and would provide a short 213.5" overall lenth, which falls halfway between the RC SB and RC LB. This would fit in many of the current DUMB standard length garage of 18-20', since it is only 17.8' long, where current EC SB don't fit in several peoples garages. I think that the 78.7" bed should be available on the dually trucks. I also think that a 121.6" bed should be available on the 2500HD and the dually trucks. This would allow contractors and other tradesmen to haul a skid of studs behind their toolbox with the tailgate up! The RC with the LONG!!! bed would be 246.1" long with a 153" wheel base (STD NOW ON CC SB), and the same length as current EXT cab LB. It could even be offered on the Ext cab models, and would only have a 177.5" wheelbase, and be 22.5' long. But for the capabilities, and for the use, it is not too big.

Best of luck, maybee GM will listen some day. Build trucks to order to fit peoples needs, and you will sell a whole heck of a lot more trucks than trying to shove an avalanche down their throats. Which by the way, has a 221.7" overall length, which is about the same as my proposed CC, a 130" wheelbase, and a 63" bed behind the midgate. These are the specs that are driving people to the avalanche, (IT TURNS TIGHT, FITS IN PARKING SPACES, AND FITS IN THEIR GARAGES), and the 1500HD could too! Also Fords super crew has a 65.5" bed, with a 139" wheelbase. These specs and size is what is driving people to this type of truck, the conservative and money conscience ones are going to the Ford.

Hunter

moparmad · December 2001

I don't understand the Explorer Sporttrac or the Avalanche. To me they don't seem to make a good SUV or a good truck,the worst of both worlds instead of the best. But obviously they are selling so someone must like them and that is fine. It is nice to see that manufacturers are at least trying to come up with new and exciting products,and trying to build new niches in the market,it can only mean good things for the future I think.
I wonder if these half-breed trucks might draw enough of the car driving truck buyers away from the fullsize market to allow the full size trucks to turn more to their original purpose,work. Seems like fullsize trucks of all description are being designed to deliver 1/4 mile acceleration,soft rides,car like handling and super fuel economy at the expense of good low end torque and toughness. Seems like you have to buy a 3/4 ton to do what a half ton use to do. Don't get me wrong fuel mileage and nice rides and all that are great,but I think they are being over emphasized at the expense of things that really matter to a true work truck.

ryanbab · December 2001

what about the S-10 crew cab. There is no point of a bed

a spare tire would barely fit

txyank1 · December 2001

than work trucks I'd like to see them leave the 1/2 tons more geared to the Sport truck market and the "HD's" more to the work truck market. I don't need no stinking bed rail caps. Or a tailgate cap. How stupid is it to put those ugly things on a Sportside? Make that stuff Dealer installed options if somebody wants a 1/2 ton for work and doesn't want to add it themself.

ricsch · December 2001

I agree with you. Those tailgate cap (protector) on the Silverado is useless especially when you put a tonneau cover on the truck. GM should have used the same as the GMC trucks across the board.

eagle63 · December 2001

I tend to agree about the hybrids, it does seem to be the worst of both worlds. the sportrac and S10 crew cabs have beds that are way too small, and the Avalanche, although it has some neat design ideas/features, is just too horribly ugly for me to even consider. If I had to get a crew cab, I'd get the dakota QC. good amount of space both interior and bed, and unlike the rest of them, it's looks good.

ryanbab · December 2001

fords supercrews bed isnt to small

It will still hold a pallet of bicks with room to spare

hunter98 · December 2001

The dakota bed is 63.7" long, and only 45.1 inches wide. You can't even put a sheet of 48" plywood, or a 48" pallet between the wheel wells. At least the avalanche has 63" length and 50" between the wheel wells. You could at least slide a sheet of plywood in the back of a 63" bed and have it hang out the back a little bit. Your talkin hanging past the tailgate by 12" or so, no big deal. You can't do that with your beloved Dakota, that I wouldn't be comfortable in. I think that all of the vehicles of that type fit a purpose.

Hunter

txyank1 · December 2001

on GMC and Chevy my GMC has uneeded holes in the tailgate. So you can't even leave the cap off to put a bedcover on. I had white plugs in the holes. Didn't look took bad on a white truck. That's good to know about the Dakota bed. I was considering one briefly before the 2001 GMC.

moparmad · December 2001

A sheet of plywood will not lay flat in a Dakota bed,I have put them in my '89 Dakota shortbed many a time. They fit just one side goes up on one wheel well. No big deal with plywood,but the taper will hate you if you do it with drywall. Of coarse any time your doing a big job it's easier to have all the material delivered,and the beds of all truck easily handle my wallet and the bill of sale. Especially after paying for the material.

sebring95 · December 2001

I agree, that's probably the only 4-door short-bed I'd consider. First off, If I was considering one of these I wouldn't be extremely concerned about the bed size BUT many of these beds are too small for anything. If I can't close the tailgate with a 4wheeler in it, it's too short. And the Dakota looks proportional. The S-10, Tacoma, and Ford Sporttrac just looking funky with the short bed (in relation to the overall truck size). The Avalache also looks very proportional IMHO, it's the plastic lego set glued to the side the kills it for me. Can't they just make them nice and smooth looking like the Silverados and have a Nascar option for the folks in need plastic trim pieces?

boaz47 · December 2001

Is the space open between the cab and the bed when the window is removed and bulkhead folded down on the Avalanche? I had wondered how that worked? If it is open what keeps the cold air out when you are hauling plywood? In Southern California this might not be much of a concern most of the year but what about the northern states. Once the bulkhead is down and the window is out what separates the passengers from the outside world?

oldharry · January 2002

But I don't know what the bed on a S-10 crew cab is good for, or any of the really short ones, unless to stand up a garbage can.

If an Avalanche is open in the back when the mid gate is open, does it draw in exhaust fumes at some speeds? I remember reading owners manuals in station wagons that cautioned against driving with the rear window down.

Oh, second thought on really short beds. Bringing home a can of gas for the lawn mower, an unpleasant task for the sedan owner.

Harry

erikheiker · January 2002

I agree with you. The SportTrac and others with the 3 foot bed make no sense at all. The concept works in third world countries, but my guess it's a fad that will have a limited life-span here. It seems to be a compromise that leaves you with the worst of both worlds. Too many people buy vehicles without having a clue about what they really need.

obyone · January 2002

a couple hundred pound bags of cow manure, I would definitely take the 3 foot bed rather than the Denali or the car......

renonevada · January 2002

I just toured the Detroit Auto Show. Not much exciting news except that Dodge has promised to take the lead in producing the fastest US production vehicles sold. The killer news is the new 2003 Dodge SRT-10 RAM with a 500-hp Viper V-10 under the hood. They stated that it WILL be produced. Dodge has created a new high-performance division made up of former AMG execs from Germany. They promise to take over the lead in speed and horsepower.

Is there a limit to how much HP can be used in a factory-produced on/off-road truck? Obviously not according to the Big 3. Bring it on!

tomh12 · January 2002

And if those cows ever quit pooping in bags, I would REALLY want the bed...
Tom

txyank1 · January 2002

can in the cab. Don't want it sliding around in the bed. The can might scratch the bed. I used to borrow my wife's car so I could put the golf clubs in the trunk so they wouldn't roll around in the bed. Got over that.

yellowdr · January 2002

Based upon the tone of this discussion, I thought that I would be the one compact crew owner to explain why I purchased one of these small bed trucks.

We have a Jeep and I enjoy a truck. My wife drives the Jeep. The truck bed will still hold a deer or other game, small projects, lawnmovers, lawn tractor, and the like will fit. Plywood does not........

I had to trade my 'new' truck with a 6' bed for the 4 door model since it will handle a child seat safely(2 kids and a dog). It was a big trade off in bed size but...better a small bed in a truck than any minivan!!!
Couldn't justify the poor gas mileage of the larger trucks.
Of course this is just one opinion.

txyank1 · January 2002

what kind of mileage do you get? I can live with a small bed but want more cab room than the compacts have. Did consider a Dakota though.

yurian44 · January 2002

I was at a Nissan dealership yesterday. The new Crew Cab long bed has a 74 1/2 inch bed. Since the Chevy and Ford short bed 1/2 tons only have 78 inch beds, i hardly consider that to be a huge concern to most people. Unless you regularly carry 4X8 sheets of plywood, siding or MDF it would seem to handle most jobs easily. There are only a couple of hundred of truck models out there and millions of people with different hauling needs. I personally like the number of options that are now out there for me, no longer do i only have a 6 1/2 foot bed or an 8 foot bed as my sole options.

revka · January 2002

just a brief interruption to let you know about this new discussion: Pickup Trucks for Women (experiences & opinions). Come check it out and join in the discussion if you'd like. Thanks for your participation.

And now back to the subject of current pickup truck trends. Happy motoring!

Revka
Host
Hatchbacks / Station Wagons / Women's Auto Center Boards

sebring95 · February 2002

Anyone seen this? Car and Driver tested it this month and it was a very funny article. Basically they said this vehicle is needed about as much as mint-flavored draino.

quadrunner500 · February 2002

Wife saw it as we were driving past Cadillac dealership several months ago. I said, nah...no pickup truck from Caddy. She insisted it had a bed.

Saw it for the first time yesterday on Superbowl commercial.

obyone · February 2002

with paper plates. Those things are pretty fast, even though I had 800# in the bed when I raced him. Couldn't believe he had paper plates and taking the truck up to a 100.

jcphenry · February 2002

I have to say that the most practical new development is the 4-wheel steering system on the GMC Denali, projected to be available eventually on less-expensive GMC and Chevrolet trucks in the future. As a former owner of a 4WS vehicle, I can say this should contribute significantly to ease of handling in congested areas. the turning circle of the Denali truck was in the neighborhood of 37 ft,
shorter than most passenger cars and approaching the circle of sport sedans from Audi and BMW.

sc0rpi0 · February 2002

Thats been done on Honda Prelude back in the 80s, if I remember correctly. I'd love to have one, though, one thing I'm missing about my Tacoma is the turning radius.

jcphenry · February 2002

The Prelude 4WS was a mechanical linkage system, and pretty trouble free (my experience 154,000 mi.);the Denali system is more like the system that was featured on the Mazda 626 sedan at the same time: electronically-linked servo-controlled, which I heard wasn't trouble-prone either. It should be an advantage to anyone who has to drive in cities or park frequently in parking lots that are scaled for smaller vehicles. Having had the feature once, I would buy it again. Unfortunately, not many manufacturers put it on their vehicles. A full-size truck is about as good a platform as you can get to give this kind of handling feature the exposure it deserves, since the market is so much larger for trucks than for compact coupes. I hope that GM brings it downmarket quickly and prices it reasonably. The Denali pickup is too expensive overall to attract large numbers of buyers of this system.

rsholland · February 2002

Most of the recent enhancements with current trucks seem oriented towards power, comfort and styling. While this is all well and good, I would like to see more thought put in in terms of making pickups more functional an useful. With that in mind, here are some suggestions:

 I think GM's "QuadraSteer" 4-wheel-steering is an excellent idea, especially for full-size pickups. I hope it pans out for GM and their owners. The only downside I see, other than increased complexity, is costs. I understand it's something like a $4500 option. That price has to come down if it's going to make any headway into mainstream pickups. If it doesn't, it will remain just a curiosity for most pickup owners.

 I hope we see more full-time 4WD, or on-demand 4WD systems like GM's Insta-Trac. GM's using it on trucks with up to 8600 GVWs. How long will be before we see it on 1-tons?

 I would like to see an integrated generator, that can be used to power electrical tools, etc. When I say "integrated," I'm talking about a built-in unit that can be accessed from a panel in the rear fenders. I would like to see customers have the option of getting a small generator, for small stuff; or be able to purchase a large 10,000 watt or larger generator, that would be able to power a house if need be. Perhaps it could run off the vehicle's engine, and not a separate engine? I would think a pickup's diesel engine would be perfect for this type of application.

I would also like to see an integrated, built-in (to the rear fender) air compressor, again as an option.

 I would like to see more mid-gates, like that found on the Chevy Avalanche.

 I would like to see an bed extender that is built in, and folds down into the tailgate when not being used. Current bed extenders look like they came from Pep Boys.

 I would like to see that above mentioned bed extender have the ability to fold out flat extending the tailgate by another 20" or soand have the tailgate drop down, so that when the bed extender is folded out, could be used as a ramp to load ATVs, etc.

 I think the Chevy Avalanche's fender storage pockets are an excellent idea. I hope more truck companies expand upon that idea.

 I think the "step" on the side of the rear bumper of the Chevy Avalanche is also an excellent idea. Again, I hope more trucks adopt that feature. It's especially helpful when the tailgate is down, and you want to get into the pickup bed.

 GMC is now showing a concept pickup, the Terra4, http://www.edmunds.com/news/autoshows/articles/48983/page008.html http://www.wieck.com/public/*2PV_034533 that has side access to the bed. This is another terrific idea. I hope it sees production.

 I would like to see "step-side" pickups have useful step-sides. Current step-side "steps" are almost useless in terms of function. They're either too high up on the fender to be of any use, or too small and poorly shaped.

 I would like to see better-looking integrated running boards that go from the front tire to the rear tire, and don't stop at the end of the cab.

As I've indicated with this list, there's a whole lot of things that can be done to make trucks more useful.

Bob

Current pickup truck trends

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles