Buying a new truck

peter1234 wrote: Reid my v 10 excursion is at 180k and if i keep changing my oil between 10 and 12k miles as i have since new i'm thinking i can get 300k out of it

I'm with you there Peter, as me saying "I'm getting closer", actually means sometime in the next 5 years, as witnessed and recalled by some here familiar with my 98 Explorer which I "gave" away to Jerry's son (many here know Jerry) 18 months ago with 391,000 on the dial. He's getting very close to 400,000 I hear. I've been putting synthetic in my V-10 for the last 140,000 miles (I bought it at 50K miles) and am convinced it helps me get 13.8 highway mpg vs something like 13.8002.

TRBenj wrote: P71, are you and zach related? Red ram trucks, gray 2001's and a passion for inflatable water sports- you must be long lost brothers!

Haha, not that I know of, but maybe!

bhectus wrote: P71, did you drive the Ecoboost? Your "Hemi" doesn't hold a candle to it power-wise and that "little V6" will make your truck turn its tailpipe under and slink home embarrassed.   I drove them both. The Hemi is an absolute dog compared to the Ecoboost. And I'm an unbiased opinion, I bought the 5.0L motor.

Ha! Yeah, no. The Egoboost is all marketing. It's really not that special. A high-strung, complicated, expensive V6 that gets no better mileage than a V8.

And what were the rear gears on the Egoboost and the Ram you tested? That makes more of a difference than anything. I had a Silverado with the 5.3 and 3.42 gears and my buddy has a GMC Sierra with the 5.3 and 3.73s. You would never believe they are the same engine.

My truck moves. If it's a dog, it's a greyhound.

Zach made a good statement earlier in this thread pondering when/if the marine engine companies would start using some of the later high-performance auto engines for marine applications. Oh I believe he was referring mostly to the Hemi and 5.0 engines, the 6.0 GM engine has been doing just that for sometime now, in the great 409 and 450 hp engines. And the 6.2 supercharged is outta this world.

Ok guys..... My turn: Thread-jack but not really.....

After an awesome 1900 mile trip to the Adirondacks pulling the Barefoot and camping..... Val and I are looking at looking at trading in the ol' 78 Ford Camper Special and the AWD Astro Van for a truck that will tow the Barefoot and carry a slide in camper.

Looking at the big 3, they all look about the same as far as numbers....

So looking for recomendations on a truck to carry 22-2500 and tow 4500. Need a crew cab.... but like the Chevy crews because the rear seat bottom flips up and out of the way for old dogs to lay on the floor and old owners not to lift onto the seats......

So anything I should look for or stay away from? The trim levels of the Fords are too numerous to keep straight and the Rams are even worse....

What set-up - Engine? Gearing? 3/4 vs 1 ton? ride vs fuel use?




The Astro (Vortec 4.3) worked pretty darn hard up the Va/WestVa and Adirondack hills.... but we averaged 13.6 mpg over the 1900 miles.

P71_CrownVic wrote: TRBenj wrote: P71, are you and zach related? Red ram trucks, gray 2001's and a passion for inflatable water sports- you must be long lost brothers! Haha, not that I know of, but maybe! bhectus wrote: P71, did you drive the Ecoboost? Your "Hemi" doesn't hold a candle to it power-wise and that "little V6" will make your truck turn its tailpipe under and slink home embarrassed.   I drove them both. The Hemi is an absolute dog compared to the Ecoboost. And I'm an unbiased opinion, I bought the 5.0L motor. Ha! Yeah, no. The Egoboost is all marketing. It's really not that special. A high-strung, complicated, expensive V6 that gets no better mileage than a 350 cubic inch V8. And what were the rear gears on the Egoboost and the Ram you tested? That makes more of a difference than anything. I had a Silverado with the 5.3 and 3.42 gears and my buddy has a GMC Sierra with the 5.3 and 3.73s. You would never believe they are the same engine. My truck moves. If it's a dog, it's a greyhound.

They were geared similarly. Somewhere around 3.55's. If it's all marketing, line your bad boy truck up against one and see what happens. You obviously haven't done your research.

probably not needed for a 2200 lb slide in

Gary S wrote: I know it does not matter to you Brett but after 10 years,some of us keep our vehicles awhile how's it going to hold up then?

Yup, I'm still driving my 95 diesel Suburban!! It is getting to the point where is is costing me $$ to keep it on the road but, I don't want to spend 60K to get a new truck!!

reidp wrote: P71_CrownVic wrote:    The Egoboost is all marketing. It's really not that special. A high-strung, complicated, expensive V6 that gets no better mileage than a 350 cubic inch V8. A poster on the PN thread made a very good point in that you don't or shouldn't compare the Ecoboost to a 5.3 or older 350 GM in terms of fuel mileage as the EB is way more powerful and should burn more fuel.   It should instead be compared to a 6.0 or 6.2 GM or 5.7 Toyota. Now how do those compare?   And "high-strung" in terms of engines normally refers to high revving tendencies or requirements in order to make power. New Boss 302 Mustang, 444 hp/7500 rpm. That's what I'd call high-strung. All of the V8s mentioned in this thread, including the 5.0 and Hemi, require significantly more rpm to approach the power delivered by the EB. Not trying to start an argument but them's are facts and easily obtainable.   I'm certainly not in the market for one, and while I agree that it's really nothing special, esp in terms of mpg's, once you've ACTUALLY ridden in one, hammered down with a load behind it, blindfolded (in the passenger's seat) so all brand bias is set aside, you''re gonna most certainly say Holy Sh&T! Unless you already own a diesel.

I'm not sure how that "350 cubic inch V8" statement got into my post, I never typed it.

As for the 3.5 Egoboost being compared to the 6.0/6.2, all I have to say is that Ford does NOT do that, they compare it to the 5.3. Ford doesn't compare it to the 6.2 because they have their own 6.2 to compare to GMs 6.2.

And I have driven a Egoboost powered vehicle, it's not that impressive, certainly no more impressive than the V8 in my Ram.    

No it's not the hardware ie turbo's etc Reid. It's the the stuff that makes them work. Dads Lincoln is a good example. 11 years old approx 65K the electronic dash starts going out. First it was things that were nice to have but didn't affect the driving,odometer,compass,trunk open,door a jar etc. He took it into the dealer,sorry cannot repair can't get parts. About 4 months later on my way home from Florida everything left goes out, speedo,gas gauge,temp, kind of important stuff. Now I'm worried that if I shut it off I won't get it going again because the alarm is part of that dash unit too. Got to where I was going,turned out that was no problem. But because of that you can't go to a junk yard and get another,that info and the mileage are stored in that unit. So Ford had no way to support their product, what are you supposed to do junk it? They did not even offer to look thru their parts system for the part, thru the internet I found a new one at a dealer in Michigan. In the end I was finally able to find someone who could repair the original and then needed no reprograming. Same thing is going to happen when PCM runs out of Ford ecu's. I understand thats just the way it's going to be,doesn't mean I have to like it.
All these ways of making more power is not consumer driven but in fact government regulations. All the manufacturers have to get their corporate combined fuel mileage up and they are turning to European methods of taking little engines and artificially boosting them because of their experence with government regulations. I'm also curious if these ecoboost engines have to use premium fuel,in our area it's 40 cents more a gallon. Our Volvo needs it and if you don't use it you can feel the difference.

Actually he's a very good one Bret. Don't know if it may have been a bad service writer. I have had great experiences there and I had bought my cars at other dealers. Dad bought and serviced all his Lincoln's there! They were right next door to where I worked for 33 years and have now bought the location I was at to expand the dealership. I just feel that this is the start of what the Japanese have successfully pioneered,treating a vehicle as an appliance,use it, throw it away
Don't forget that in case of a 67 Chevy truck,they were making changes and updating every year. The Lincoln didn't change from 00 til the end of production in '11 because for many of their buyers it was their last car repeat business was just not part of the big plan

Well, I got my new truck sitting just the way I wanted. Still rides great, looks a little tougher, and she's all ready for hunting season! Still haven't hit 1,000 miles yet but I've been really happy with it so far. Will get another solid off road test this weekend at the hunt lease.

Zach, they are Nitto Trail Grappler M/T's. Awesome tires. I had a set on my Tundra and loved them. These are a 295/70/18 which is about a 34"x11.50" tire. Not too loud on the street but a very aggressive tread pattern and great off road.

phatsat67 wrote: Edit: Road noise is big to me too. I don't know how some guys take a perfectly new quiet truck and put tires on that howl at the moon.

I'm a redneck.

And I'll deal with the road noise because street tires out in the woods where my lease is don't cut it. It is swampy, real swampy. Getting stuck means a 10 mile walk to the nearest hard road to get help. AAA doesn't come!

They aren't that loud. Louder than stock tires obviously but for a mud tire they are very quiet. I had the same ones on my Tundra but taller and 2" wider and those definitely hummed.

That's ok CQ, I'm sure you can still get your pretty lips around it.