Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

Pickup Trucks for Women (Experiences/Opinions)

24

Comments

  • bobsquatchbobsquatch Posts: 136
    Wow! How to make friends on a female dominated thread. Pretty narrow minded dude. All of my friends think my sister is a fox. Femenine to the core and she drives a lifted 2001 F250 diesel 4X4 with 35" tires. She hauls her dune buggy and bikes with it. Yep she can ride to. None of the guys chasing her think she isn't femenine. Not to be picking on you too much but it sounds like you would have a woman ask you for her shoes if she wants to go somewhere.
  • mtngalmtngal Posts: 1,911
    I envy your sister! Wish I could afford a diesel 4x4 pickup, but I'm married with a house that needs a new roof.

    Another reason why a girl might like a pickup - it's great for hauling around ice hockey gear (especially if you are a goalie). Many of the girls on my old hockey team drove pickups. They are great for hauling around hockey gear to games and tournaments. Our goalie had a 4x4 lifted Tacoma, lockers, etc. Another girl really upset a car salesman when she and her husband were just about to sign on the dotted line for a new car, and then backed out of it when her hockey bag wouldn't fit in the trunk. She also ended up with a compact pickup, come to think of it...

    Actually, I think mrb11 was trying to get something going on this board - its been quiet for a while.
  • jcave1jcave1 Posts: 137
    Something about a "4X4 driving gal" that is pretty cool. As long as it her's, not her boy friends. Better than a Neon, any day.
  • mtngalmtngal Posts: 1,911
    At least a girl driving a pickup will, most likely, not be too concerned about breaking a nail...
  • jcave1jcave1 Posts: 137
    I've not seen a girl driving a pickup:

    1. Applying makeup.
    2. Studying her georgeous self in the rear view.
    3. Putting on mascara.
    4. Doing her nails.

    Not bashing the ladies. Just think more should drive trucks instead of those other things.
  • KCRamKCRam Mt. Arlington NJPosts: 3,516
    Of my female friends who have pickups, the majority of them are moms who feel the full-size pickup is A) a safer vehicle, B) allows them to get three kids across the back seat without them on top of each other, and C) can do whatever household or recreational duties they throw at it. With more and more folks having the local downtown shopping area replaced with a Super WalMart, a Home Depot, a warehouse club, and a regional mega-mall for eveything else, it's almost a requirement that a family vehicle be able to carry large loads more than 10-15 years ago. The extended/"baby-crew" cab full-size pickup (F150 SuperCrew, Ram Quad, GM 1500HD to a lesser extent) has pretty much replaced the old full-size station wagon we remember from the 70s. The increase of "true" foor door trucks in the half-ton and compact truck classes will attract more women - most of them aren't interested in 1-ton crew cab dually trucks unless they tow loaded trailers all day, every day.

    kcram
    Host
    Smart Shopper and FWI Message Boards
  • mtngalmtngal Posts: 1,911
    I can't argue with that logic. I have noticed more women in LA driving them. And not necessarily the hiking, hockey-playing, horsey, 4x4 type. The funny thing is that I used to live in Texas over 10 years ago. The vast majority of vehicles on the road were pickups, and many were driven by women - it was no big deal. I think that the rest of the country is starting to find out what Texans have known for years - pickups are very practical vehicles.

    And who is to say what a truck person looks like. One of the guys I know at work was shocked when he saw me drive up in our old Nissan pickup. He always thought of me as the sports car type (OK, he didn't know me very well).
  • ryanbabryanbab Posts: 7,240
    I agree 100% with your 1-4 there. I have never seen that at all.
  • mrb11mrb11 Posts: 58
    I didn't mean to upset any of you ladies. I'm sure there are many truck driving woman that are feminine. IMO it just does not look very feminine. Would a lady wearing a pair of army boots look very feminine? Of course not. She may well be very feminine....she just wouldn't look very feminine. Would a man wearing a skirt look very masculine? He may be masculine but he wouldn't look it. Call me old fashion and not P.C.
  • mtngalmtngal Posts: 1,911
    LOL! Actually you didn't upset me - I thought it was a good way of getting some discussion going on the board. You bring up a whole philosopical argument as to what is feminine. I won't touch that one because I think it is totally in the eyes of the beholder.

    As far as women in combat boots - I have seen a few women who looked very feminine in combat boots. A couple who looked too feminine to be in the Army, IMHO. But then, what do I know - I only spent 10 years in the Army, joining when they had just integrated women into the regular Army, doing away with the WACs...
  • jcave1jcave1 Posts: 137
    You're being to easy on him..........
  • mtngalmtngal Posts: 1,911
    I had a really good laugh, especially when he mentioned Army boots!

    Forgot to mention - one of the most feminine officers I knew was really good at what she did... And she drove a Chevy Luv - wasn't that what Chevy's first attempt at a compact pickup was called? It was kind of cute, but didn't compare to my Chevy half ton...
  • treadltlytreadltly Posts: 12
    mrb11- you're too funny. You reminded me of when I used to work for the utility company in powerhouse construction...wearing steel-toed boots, belt with a load of keys, & a hard hat. None of the guys thought anything of my attire at work (same as theirs)but I did get quite a bit of ribbing if they saw me on the weekend and was still wearing the boots. They would tell me I'd never catch a man that way! HaHaHa, they were so funny! I did "catch a man", so to speak, on another construction project, wearing the same thing...boots, hardhat & all. We've been married 15 years now, and have built 3 houses together, 3 kids...had lots of fun.
    Now, for why I'm here. Looking to buy myself my first big pickup truck to haul a travel trailer suitable for 5 of us. I've looked at various lightweight trailers, weight would be 3500-5000 # GVW. Since my husband commutes and won't let me get the truck for him (bad mpg), I'll have to make it my daily vehicle & give up the new minivan option (never owned one yet). I'd be looking at the crew/quad cab designs for fitting the whole family. I have been looking at the Dakota small 8 cyl. which could have sold me, except the headrests are fixed, and unfortunately would leave my husband (6'-4") with too much whiplash potential for my liking. He hates shopping, so said get whatever I like. I'd love his input, but he doesn't want to go to any dealers & deal with them. Of the big ones, it looks like Edmund's gives the Ford series the best thumbs up. I also really like the concept of the new Ford Explorer Sport Trac, supposed to be a combo midsize SUV (part explorer) & crew type midsize truck. It only has a 4' bed, but the biggest 4-dr. cab of them all. Backseat room is important to me as my 13 year old is likely to be over 6' in 4 years, and we'll likely keep this 10 years. I guess the benefit of the sport trac is that we could throw all 5 of our bikes in it and go hit the trails easily, and still get pretty good daily mpg. Only drawback there, I was told by my dealer is that it doesn't come in an 8 cyl., so probably won't tow enough trailer. Any personal experiances out there towing a 24' trailer with a small 8 (4.7L or so)? Mountains terrains are definite for us, so brakes are just as important as torque & HP. Thanks for any suggestions.
  • KCRamKCRam Mt. Arlington NJPosts: 3,516
    Hi treadltly

    My first recommendation is the Chevy/GMC 1500HD crew cab, followed by the F150 SuperCrew and Ram 1500 Quad. The reason I would tell you to stay away from the Dakotas/SportTracs/Tacomas/Frontiers is because in addition to moving the trailer, you have 5 people to get moving as well. Once you load 5 people and some luggage in the truck, and add the tongue weight of the trailer (usually 10 percent of the trailer, or about 350-500 pounds for you), you have overloaded most compact trucks. That leaves no power to get the trailer moving and your supposed better fuel economy will vanish. You never want to buy a truck that you will max out on a regular basis - it won't last at all. And if you're looking to keep this rig for a good long time, get the larger truck now.

    Doing a quick spec check, a SportTrac can only tow 2750 pounds in 4x2 config, so right away, that's out. Dakota Quad can tow up to 6200, but you hate the headrests. Tacoma Double Cab and Frontier Crew Cab are 5000, you'd be right at their limits. The Chevy/GMC 1500HD is good for 8300 pounds of trailer standard, 10,300 max. Ram 1500 Quad trailer range is 4450 standard, 8550 max. The F150 SuperCrew is good for up to 8000 (can't find the base rating at the moment).

    Go with a full-size 4 door, and it will see your 13 year old behind the wheel when he's old enough.

    kcram
    Host
    Smart Shopper and FWI Message Boards
  • white250white250 Posts: 68
    The sport trac is rated to tow 5300 lbs. I have no idea where you seen 2750 at.
  • white250white250 Posts: 68
    I,m sorry , your right . I went to ford's website & for manual trans was 2400 to 2740 lbs, but automatic was 5000 to 5300 lbs. Something don't seem right about this tho. My wife drives one with a 4.10LS and auto & I know it can tow 5000 lbs. You would think the manual would have no problem too....ummmm. I wonder if its a misprint?
  • KCRamKCRam Mt. Arlington NJPosts: 3,516
    white250, we can both be right :)

    Still won't change my recommendation, though. A 5000-pounder would still max out the truck - gives you zero margin for error. I'm a strong believer in buying more truck than you need - otherwise, you probably don't need a truck. I used to drive half-tons... F150 4x4s to be specific. Left them a smoking mess when I was done with them. I now have a Ram 3500 dually 4x4 with the Cummins diesel and couldn't be happier. It's done everything I've asked, and a few things that surprised me, too. After a rapid snow thaw a few years back, a friend's car sank in a muddy area where it was parked. Tow truck went to get it and sank to its axles. The Ram jumped in the mud and pulled out the tow truck in reverse without breaking a sweat. An F150 couldn't have done that.

    kcram
    Host
    Smart Shopper and FWI Message Boards
  • white250white250 Posts: 68
    I think the same way !! I would never max out a truck either. I owned a 96' & a 99' dodge ram 1500. I liked them after I worked out all the bugs they had, but just could see myself driving the new 2002 model. So, I bought a ford F250 and could,nt be happier, everyone asked me why a 250?. I told them that I wanted a truck that would be more than I would ever need. A 1/2 ton would have been plenty for now but, you never know what you are gonna need in the future.I plan on keeping this truck for awhile. Plus The 250 is a hell of alot more truck for $2000 more than the F150. My wife drives the sport trac, she loves it, we get alot more use out of it than the expedition we had before. Get 22 mpg on the highway too!!!! With a fourwheeler in the back!!
  • mtngalmtngal Posts: 1,911
    I'll second the suggestion of a full sized pickup. The seats are so much more comfortable than the Tacoma, and since it sounds like to do lots of driving, that's important. And since I've had problems with vehicles that I've asked too much of, I definitely think you should get more truck than you think you need. It pays off in the long run (and I used to love my 3/4 ton chevy, lousy gas mileage and all).
  • treadltlytreadltly Posts: 12
    Not that I hadn't read the specs of various vehicles on Edmund's, I just didn't know how close one should go with the GVW ratings & hauling capacity. Thanks to you experienced folks for the help I was looking for.
    It looks like my husband wants me to still get a good gas miler for everyday AND I can get a "big old truck" for vacation & utility needs; which is often in this building & remodeling family.
    Next question: how long has a crew cab design (real 4 door) been around in a 3/4 ton config? Since they don't call the engines out that way any more, what liter number range is it (5.3?) If they just made a big old American wagon, I'd consider it. Apparently they've been gone awhile. Probably not cool enough. And just for the record, I AM A SOCCER MOM TOO! For all the negative posts I have read on many townhall threads, I can't figure the negativity of that term. Am I missing something here?
  • akjbmwakjbmw Posts: 231
    Sounds like a similar inference as Van Man.
    However, a multi-passenger van with the 3/4 ton capacity could handle the kids and serious towing too. Not talkin' mini-van here... The large van would have a bit more air to heat or cool than my Ext-cab with the same footprint, but would have good towing and/or hauling capacity. I guess they are a bit top heavy, but if they are driven like a van instead of a Corvette, all should be well. Just thinkin' out loud.. ;-)
  • mtngalmtngal Posts: 1,911
    A full sized van isn't a bad idea if your trailer is a tag-along, not a 5th wheel. A friend of mine used a 3/4 ton Ford cargo van to haul her heavy 2 horse trailer without any problems. She did end up trading it in on a 3/4 pickup when she bought a 4 horse gooseneck trailer.

    I used to own a 3/4 ton Dodge cargo van that I converted to a camper. It was a blast to drive, though it did take a bit of getting used to (as they say, you are the first to arrive at an accident...). IMHO a pickup is actually much easier to drive.

    I don't know when they came out with the crew cabs in the 3/4 tons, but I do know that Chevy had a crew cab in a one ton back in '84 or '85, because I looked at one (a dually) that I really loved, but couldn't afford!
  • mrb11mrb11 Posts: 58
    Skip the truck and go get the red Corvette. You'll appear more feminine and get tons of looks when you arrive at the soccer field. Just kidding. Go get your truck and enjoy!!
  • mtngalmtngal Posts: 1,911
    LOL! Giggle, giggle, giggle.

    On the other hand, maybe she should get both the truck and the Corvette. A car for every reason...
  • KCRamKCRam Mt. Arlington NJPosts: 3,516
    Ford F250-Super Duty:
    5.4L V8 standard, 6.8L V10 and 7.3L V8 turbo diesel optional

    Chevy Silverado/GMC Sierra 1500HD (despite the "1", it's a 3/4 ton):
    6.0L V8 standard, no engine options

    Chevy Silverado/GMC Sierra 2500HD:
    6.0L V8 standard, 8.1L V8 and 6.6L V8 turbo diesel optional

    2003 Dodge Ram 2500 Quad (will begin showing up late summer):
    5.7L V8 standard, 8.0L V10 and 5.9L I6 turbo diesel optional

    One thing I advise before going with a full-size van... yes, they are as capable as their pickup brethren in the same weight class, but if you live in an area susceptible to windy conditions, that will be an absolute bear to handle when the breezes pick up. Unlike minivans, full-size vans are like driving walls when it comes to aerodynamics, and if you don't have a strong grip, a stiff wind will blow you all over a highway.

    kcram
    Host
    Smart Shopper and FWI Message Boards
  • mtngalmtngal Posts: 1,911
    Ah, how quickly I forgot that little fact. Yes, they are worse in the wind than my Wrangler, and that's saying something! They are almost as bad as a camper I once had.

    That's not to say that you have to pull off, but it is a struggle to keep them straight down the road at freeway speeds.
  • treadltlytreadltly Posts: 12
    I do really appreciate the range of possibilities you've all suggested. If I had the funds I'd get the NEW big truck and a minivan (I never have more than 5 kids with me). Reality is the minivan will be 1-2 years old for 'round town. The truck however will have to be at least 4 years old to be affordable in a crewcab. I understand the oldest Ford F150 Supercrew is only 2001. I'm sure the F250 would be more likely available as a crewcab, but they always change the names. Anyone driven a good '96 to '98 crewcab they would recommend? If I knew the names I'd know where to search. I noticed the older "super" term often just means extended cab. Thanks!
  • KCRamKCRam Mt. Arlington NJPosts: 3,516
    Hi again treadltly :)

    As far as Ford is concerned, "crew cab" has always meant a full 4-door cab. "Super cab" means the shorter extended cab. "Super Duty" is a name referring to the weight class, like Chevy/GMC/Dodge's "Heavy Duty" name.

    Ford first offered the F250HD Crew Cab in 1996, and the 97 was the final year of the old body style. There was no 1998 F250HD - the SuperDuty trucks were introduced in January of 98 as earlyu 1999s. The Chevy/GMC 2500 crew cab was first available in 1999. The 96-97 F250 was very "old school" - the body was first used in the fall of 1979 as a 1980 model, and thus is the least comfortable of the bunch. I'd recommend looking for a 99 Ford F250SD crew cab or a Chevy/GMC 2500 crew cab if you need to go used. They are probably the most affordable and capable you can get for the bucks.

    kcram
    Host
    Smart Shopper and FWI Message Boards
  • treadltlytreadltly Posts: 12
    Thanks for the info. I am looking again tonight. In searching thru autotrader and cars.com I find a lot of listings just don't specify body styles until you click further for details. You can get bleary-eyed clicking through so many just to find all regular cabs, or no mention whatsoever (so assume reg. cab.). Your last post has given me a definite target to go for. I think I have searched enough, and know how to get TMV's from this site for anything I would go look at. I just can't thank Edmund's and all the townhall members enough for all the education I've gotten here! It just makes you want to go look under the hood, doesn't it?
    This may not be the appropriate forum but, what do you think of Oil flushes(by the tune-up & smog shops)? For that matter radiator flushes? I would think it can't hurt, but how often?
  • mtngalmtngal Posts: 1,911
    I'd like to know what you think about power radiator flushes, especially since I am thinking about something like that as the next step with trying to fix the Tacoma (overheating going uphill, no noise, new thermostat didn't make a difference).
  • KCRamKCRam Mt. Arlington NJPosts: 3,516
    tread and mtn,

    A radiator flush done correctly is a good thing. The remains of any rusted radiator core will show up along with discoloration due to contaminants. Anti-freeze can be "deadly" if not thoroughly flushed and changed - Despite all the advances in coolant technology, I change mine every 18 months, period end of story.

    Oil flushes are bogus. Change your oil based on how fast it gets dirty, and keep the engine tuned and running properly, and your oil shouldn't need to be flushed. If your engine develops deposits quickly, then change it more often. If you can get by with reasonably clean oil for 5000 miles, then that should be fine as well.

    kcram
    Host
    Smart Shopper and FWI Message Boards
  • mtngalmtngal Posts: 1,911
    Thanks for the information. I definitely think that should be the next step in trying to sort the Taco out. My other half is half inclined to just let it sit (drive it around the block once a week) for 6 months, then trade it off. Neither of us like it enough to want to put a whole lot of money into fixing it. It will have to wait for 3-4 weeks anyway, until we have a chance to get to it. Our now daily-driver Wrangler needs an oil change and tire rotation, and that comes first.
  • treadltlytreadltly Posts: 12
    I have an old suburban I'd like to keep going just a bit longer, hence the flush questions. I did read further in other forums here about leaving sludge where it is, rather than have it circulate into the moving parts & cause more problems. I hadn't really thought of it that way. I know when my boss & I used to test new piping systems (industrial), we used to run an oil flush for days to a week until the strainer baskets came up with no welding slag or metal particles. Mind you, this was new piping, and the connections were isolated from any of the final flanges to the equipment. I'm glad I asked before jumping the gun on this one. It sounded good at first. Thanks
  • KCRamKCRam Mt. Arlington NJPosts: 3,516
    tread, that's a common bit of advice for many mechanical devices - flush it out when new to get all the shavings, etc. out of it. That's fine if you have the time and opportunity to baby the device in question. But unlike your piping systems, most people don't have the luxury of pre-testing when they buy a vehicle.

    Go ask a trucking company what they do with a brand new Peterbilt when they pick it up from the dealer. Yup, they fire it up, hook a loaded trailer to it, and run the bejeezus out of it from day one. Heavy duty trucks don't make money for their owners being "babied" for the first XXXX miles. That applies to light trucks as well. They don't run as well if they have "nothing" to do. When you buy a Dodge Ram with the Cummins diesel, you are advised to "give it work" as soon as possible - the rings seat faster and more evenly when you can get the engine temperatures up where they should be. Gasoline engines are similar. If all you do with a brand new V8 is drive down the street to 7-Eleven for the first 1000 miles, you've actually harmed it more than helped it. Go find a country two-lane highway with some hills, throw some crap in the back, and DRIVE the thing. I took delivery of my Ram on the Friday of Memorial Day weekend in 1996. By the time I got to work Tuesday, I had a good 500 miles on it. And a big smile :)

    kcram
    Host
    Smart Shopper and FWI Message Boards
  • mullins87mullins87 Posts: 959
    I must apologize, I just read this thread for the first time. Going back to mrb's post about certain vehicles not being feminine, I think one of the sexiest sights on the road is a woman driving a Wrangler with the top off.
  • jcave1jcave1 Posts: 137
    I'm so glad to see this thread is still very much alive. It's certainly been interesting. Looks like it might continue.
  • obyoneobyone Posts: 8,054
    is a truck? Now that's news to me. Also, when you state "with the top off", are you referring to the Wrangler or the woman? Call me curious....not sexist.
  • mtngalmtngal Posts: 1,911
    A Wrangler could be defined as a truck because of its truck suspension system, and because it has an open bed in the back like a truck (if you take the top off or have a bikini top on the vehicle, not referring to the girl in it). The driver sits as high as a truck.

    It could be defined as an SUV - it is 4x4 and certainly a sporty utility vehicle - much more than many of the current "SUVs." Even with stock tires the driver sits up as high as many of the other SUVs. With the 30" wheel group, without a lift, it is as high as all the full sized SUVs.

    It could be defined as a subcompact convertable car - it has about that much room in it for passengers as many subcompacts, and it is a convertable regardless of what top you have on it.

    It could be defined as a hatchback/stationwagon, if you have the hard top on.

    So how do I, as an owner, define the Wrangler? A fun vehicle, whatever it is!
  • jcave1jcave1 Posts: 137
    I'd call it double fun if it's a topless girl in a topless Wrangler. It's so hard to behave. So hard.
  • mtngalmtngal Posts: 1,911
    LOL!

    Or its just nice artwork.
  • mullins87mullins87 Posts: 959
    but I wouldn't mind the girl either!!! I agree with mtngal. Just what the hell is a Wrangler? It is nearly a "do all" vehicle and a lot of fun to boot. I would love to be able to afford a Wrangler to use as my daily driver and keep the F-350 for working. But you know, mortgage and kids.
  • mtngalmtngal Posts: 1,911
    At the moment I'm not real excited about getting our Tacoma fixed, because that means we're using the Wrangler as our daily driver. The Wrangler is certainly more comfortable than the Taco. However, I've always found full sized pickups to be very comfortable, probably more comfortable than the Wrangler, so think that your F350 might be a better daily driver, unless you are talking about commuting in a congested urban area. Then the Wrangler wins big time.
  • mtngalmtngal Posts: 1,911
    the Wrangler is to look at the reviews comparing mini-SUVs. They hardly ever mention the Wrangler, so it must not fit into that category...
  • kg11kg11 Posts: 530
    In the 1930's the U.S. Govt asked manufacturers to produce a 1/4 ton truck for military purposes.My '47 CJ 2 is classified as a truck on the pink slip and insurence policy.
    It's a truck.

    kip
  • mtngalmtngal Posts: 1,911
    Good point! The military version continued to be classified and officially known as Truck, 1/4 Ton, until it was finally phased out of the Army. I was still on active duty when that happened, and have read many equipment reports (TO&Es).

    It's interesting that the pink slip for your CJ has it classified as a truck.
  • mullins87mullins87 Posts: 959
    I think the reason why the Wrangler is never mentioned in the mini-SUV comparisons is because the Wrangler will beat them every time. I can't read commercial vehicle comparisons because lots of times they never say anything bad about the vehicles. I remember one in particular that Motortrend did, I'm a little biased toward the Ford, but I promise I won't twist what they said, and if anyone has the transcripts to prove me wrong, please tell me. They compared the 3/4 ton Silverado to the F-250 XLT. The trucks were similarly loaded with extended cabs, auto's, 4x4, and so on. I'm not for sure on the engines, but I think the Ford had the 5.4 while the Chevy had a 6.0(?). They talked about how much nicer it was that the Chevy bed was 6 inches lower to the ground so loading would be easier, never mentioned what that 6 inches would cost you off road. They compared towing capabilities with a 5,000lb(I think) trailer, not maximum weight. If you'll notice, they compared the extended cabs, not crew cabs and they compared gassers, and not diesels. I know these shows try to compare what the average buyer wants, but around here, most 3/4 ton trucks are Ford PSD. I think Chevy "paid" them more than Ford for the favorable comparison. I'm sorry, this was completely off topic. I had to vent on that one, even two years later, it still makes me ill.

    Back to the thread. The long wheelbase of the F-350 does make for a comfortable ride, but I have always loved the Wrangler.
  • mtngalmtngal Posts: 1,911
    I enjoy reading the reviews of vehicles. I learn a great deal from them - if only about the reviewer. Seriously, though, what I'm looking for in a vehicle isn't what most people look for, so I take what I read at it's face value - just someone's opinion. Truck reviews are no different than SUV reviews - they don't always look at vehicles from my prospective (hence my comment about the Wrangler reviews). I take that into account, and if I were to buy what some of the reviewers suggest, I'd never get out of my driveway in winter! The Wrangler is excellent for that.

    I'm particular about the height of my trucks. As I mentioned before, I quit looking at the Dakota because the dealer I went to only had 1 and it was lowered. I thought it looked like the most worthless truck in the world. I've since seen "real" ones and am sorry I didn't look at them further. My opinion (like yours) - higher is better. Why would someone want a lower truck if it won't make it through the field when you are picking up bales of hay?

    I will admit that the F-350 I looked at (crew cab - they didn't have an extended cab when I test drove one) looked wonderful. However, I couldn't figure out how to park it. I would definitely have to practice, since I am now used to parking the Wrangler. And yes, it sure is a fun little vehicle, whatever it is!
  • mullins87mullins87 Posts: 959
    I haven't kept up with it in the last few years, but if we let Consumer Reports guide us into our vehicle purchases, we'd all be driving Camrys or Accords. The height issue, amongst many other reasons, is why I got away from a Chevy. My 2wd 350 sits higher than my last 4wd Silverado. That Chevy would come out of a field dragging objects the 350 just rolls right over. I just have to laugh when I see someone with a lowered truck. Why don't they just buy a car? It's obvious that is really what they want. We even have a couple of lowered 1 tons around here, talking about useless.
  • mtngalmtngal Posts: 1,911
    The last full sized pickup I had was a '76 3/4 ton Chevy and it had pretty good height for a 2wd. It certainly was tough. I sold it in excellent running condition in 1990 (exterior was rough, but it wasn't that great before I bought it).

    I guess its a matter of "to each his own." I agree with you - a lowered 1 ton doesn't make sense to me, but it does to someone else. I guess that's why they still make all sorts of cars - what makes sense to my parents living in the middle of the Mojave desert wouldn't work for me up here in the mountains.

    I personally don't like the styling on the 1/2 ton Ford Flare side - I prefer my truck to provide maximum cargo space (whether it be a compact or a full sized truck). On the other hand, I do like the styling on the Dodge Ram pickups. And if I were to be able to afford a full sized truck I would most likely start by looking at the Chevys, since I had such good luck with my old one(s). But if they are lower (and they could be - there was so much noise a while ago to lower both trucks and SUVs), then I'd go with the Ford or Dodge instead.
  • mullins87mullins87 Posts: 959
    Your '76 3/4 ton Chevy is a tough truck. In fact, I wish some manufacturer still made them. GM really changed their trucks from the '87 to '88 model year. I had both an '87 and an '88, you would not believe the difference. The '87 would handle anything imaginable that you would do with a 1/2 ton. That was one tough truck, it was built "like a rock". The '88 on the other hand, well, let me put it to you this way. I burnt the tranny up pulling a 4,000lb trailer. It would not drive in slow city traffic in the summer without overheating. Every damn switch in that truck gave me trouble. I measured the rear portion of the frame, under the bed. It only measured 3 inches top to bottom. The '87 measured nearly 4 inches. Everything about that truck was built too light for my taste. But, don't get me wrong, that truck ran up and down the road, empty of course, light a bat out of hell. The '87, well, anything over 70mph was beginning to push it. It had a 4.10 rear in it. I didn't have a tach, but at 70, it sounded like a Winston Cup Car. I used to drive around with the windows down just to hear it scream. Of course, I do that now just to hear the PSD and smell the exhaust.

    Boy, did I ramble on? Sorry.
This discussion has been closed.