are small trucks gone?

[Nick1994]

Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
Originally Posted By: Nick1994
And I owned an 86' Ranger. Was the biggest turd ever and didnt have much of rear suspension in it.


You should have checked to see where the rear suspension went then. There should have been a leaf pack on each side with 3-4 leaves per pack.

My parents had an '86 Ranger...biggest repair in the life of that truck...one ignition switch.
Oh it had the leaf springs in there and it sat high, but not much weight in the back made it squash right down. Mine had 146k miles in the end and with a new distributor cap and rotor, spark plugs and wires, it still only ran on 5 cylinders, leaked an insane amount of oil and the transmission was toast. It took being floored to get it to shift to get on the freeway and it got 11.5 mpg with 70 percent highway and 30 percent city. The ignition switch died too. Give your truck some time, it's 6 years newer. It'll need some work.

 

[01rangerxl]

My truck is 6 years newer than a 1986? It must have traveled through some kind of worm hole.

My truck already has 20K more miles than the one you had and isn't having those problems, so I'm not worried. Besides, you don't seem to have great luck with vehicles.

 

[supton]

You see this from time to time here. What one raves as a great vehicle someone else had as a lemon. Someone somewhere had a "bullet proof" car that imploded at 15k; and someone else had a vehicle with miserable reliablity go a bazillion miles.

It's all antedotal.

My parents had an Astrovan with the rugged 4.3L. Guess what? It suddenly started drinking oil at 100k, and required a transplant at 127k when it couldn't muster 100miles w/o needing a quart. Meanwhile my low-reliability VW should have eaten a cam by now. It went to 250k before needing clutch or turbo, still has the OEM cam, and heck managed 14miles of highway driving last night after losing most of its coolant.

Antedotal.

 

[01rangerxl]

Originally Posted By: supton
You see this from time to time here. What one raves as a great vehicle someone else had as a lemon. Someone somewhere had a "bullet proof" car that imploded at 15k; and someone else had a vehicle with miserable reliablity go a bazillion miles.

It's all antedotal.

My parents had an Astrovan with the rugged 4.3L. Guess what? It suddenly started drinking oil at 100k, and required a transplant at 127k when it couldn't muster 100miles w/o needing a quart. Meanwhile my low-reliability VW should have eaten a cam by now. It went to 250k before needing clutch or turbo, still has the OEM cam, and heck managed 14miles of highway driving last night after losing most of its coolant.

Antedotal.


We know this.

I'm responding to Nick1994's trolling with more trolling.

He does this a lot...bashes vehicles as being "junk" or whatever without anything to really support it. Meanwhile, he posts about all the problems his wonderful cars are having...remember the Beetle flywheel fiasco? The Camry that couldn't get out of its own way? Yet, it is everything he doesn't own that is a POS.

 

[Nick1994]

Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
Originally Posted By: supton
You see this from time to time here. What one raves as a great vehicle someone else had as a lemon. Someone somewhere had a "bullet proof" car that imploded at 15k; and someone else had a vehicle with miserable reliablity go a bazillion miles.

It's all antedotal.

My parents had an Astrovan with the rugged 4.3L. Guess what? It suddenly started drinking oil at 100k, and required a transplant at 127k when it couldn't muster 100miles w/o needing a quart. Meanwhile my low-reliability VW should have eaten a cam by now. It went to 250k before needing clutch or turbo, still has the OEM cam, and heck managed 14miles of highway driving last night after losing most of its coolant.

Antedotal.


We know this.

I'm responding to Nick1994's trolling with more trolling.

He does this a lot...bashes vehicles as being "junk" or whatever without anything to really support it. Meanwhile, he posts about all the problems his wonderful cars are having...remember the Beetle flywheel fiasco? The Camry that couldn't get out of its own way? Yet, it is everything he doesn't own that is a POS.

I didn't make that one clear, the Jeep is a '96, which is 6 years older.

I never said a Ranger was junk, just that it doesn't suit my needs personally because if I'm going to own a truck it's going to need more capacity. I've also never said the VW has been flawless, it's been good though. Same with the Camry, it served as an appliance to save me $$ on gas over my 96' Chevy truck with a 350 V8 (which was fantastically reliable BTW). I haven't called anybodys cars a POS. I make fun on my VW on some posts on here laughing about VW reliability, even though statistically it's done far better than most. Not trolling, everybody just got butthurt when I said that a Ranger can't do what I need it to do, therefore I won't own a small truck.

 

[01rangerxl]

Originally Posted By: Nick1994
Not trolling, everybody just got butthurt when I said that a Ranger can't do what I need it to do, therefore I won't own a small truck.


06 and I weren't responding to your post about a small truck not meeting your needs, we were responding to this...
Originally Posted By: Nick1994
So you're saying an 02' Ranger could haul that? Lol


At best misinformed, but probably trolling.

I don't go into VW threads and say "so you're saying an '04 Beetle is a good car? Lol."

I have been guilty of some bashing myself, but I try not to make a habit of it.

And FWIW, I have no problem with someone saying a small truck doesn't meet their needs. That's cool, don't buy one. What gets old is people saying "just buy a full size, small trucks aren't good for anything." Then again, in the past I have said people who buy crossovers should just buy wagons or minivans, and Hokiefyd made some good points on why he prefers crossovers. I do tend to be more defensive of the virtues of small trucks and off road oriented SUVs though because I see them as endangered species of sorts.

 

[exranger06]

Originally Posted By: Nick1994
Not trolling, everybody just got butthurt when I said that a Ranger can't do what I need it to do, therefore I won't own a small truck.

If you're referring to this post you made:
Originally Posted By: Nick1994
I wouldn't own a small pickup, it just wouldn't suit my needs. Sure I drive a VW Beetle now, but if I had a pickup I'd be doing other things with it other than just being my daily commuter. A Ranger can't tow a car hauler trailer with a car on it, that's 5-6k pounds. I also own an ATV and it won't fit in a small truck's bed with the tailgate closed. If the tailgate is open then I can't put much else in the bed without it flying out at 80 mph on the freeway. Even if the tailgate could close it would be weighed down too low to go where I need it to go off-road. All of this is possible with a half ton. I currently use my grandmother's Trailblazer for my truck needs and have pulled car trailers and have put about 800 pounds of gravel and sand bags in the back and bricks. A larger SUV can often serve the purposes of a truck if you have a trailer (I have).

The purposes I see for a small pickup would be if someone doesn't heavy haul ever and would never plan to, or for my grandfather who could use it to scoot around town and we can throw things in the bed.

Nobody got butthurt over that; in fact, nobody even replied to that post.

I realize small trucks are not for everyone, and that some people need something bigger. That's why automakers make several different size trucks, so they have something for everyone's needs. I just don't like it when people say ignorant things like small trucks don't have any purpose, or they're not "real trucks" or that to do any significant amount of hauling you NEED a half-ton.

 

[SwampSurvivor]

The factory leaf springs on my Cherokee were cracked. That was a surprising discovery when I went to replace them.

That was before I did any towing or hauling with it. One off road trip and it was sagging hard.

 

[hattaresguy]

The new Colorado's seem to be very popular I see a bunch every day.

 

[01rangerxl]

Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
The new Colorado's seem to be very popular I see a bunch every day.


I believe we have sold a couple of them here, that or the salespeople are just moving them around the lot. They are nice trucks. Little things like the way the doors shut and the look/feel of the interior materials are leaps and bounds better than they were on the last gen.

The outside of the Colorado is getting big though. I wish they could have tightened up the exterior dimensions a little, but to keep interior space and make the truck meet safety standards, they probably didn't have much of a choice. It is a little disappointing though to see so much truck on the outside, and when you get inside it feels like it doesn't have any more room than the average small truck from 10 years ago.

Overall though, I like it. It's a nice truck, and I'm glad GM is making some kind of effort to offer a smaller "right sized" truck.

 

[Silverado12]

Originally Posted By: IndyIan
Something like this would be perfect for me, put in a VVT 170-180hp 2.5 4-cyl and a manual trans for high 20's hwy mpg . Spec with 1500lb payload and 4-5k towing and its all I'd need. Pickup a round bale or load of wood on the way home from work, life would be fine!

I wouldn't want to tow that much with this kind of truck. I had a Chevy Colorado, and the brakes and engine (2.9) were too small to tow my 3K lb. boat comfortably, and I couldn't see around the boat either in the mirrors.

 

[ls1mike]

"Right sized" Is different for everyone. Each size truck has it's place. No need to argue. Right tool for the each job.
I would not buy a Ranger, S-10, Brat, el-camino or half ton to tow my 32 foot travel trailer. That is why I have the 3/4 ton.
If I didn't have the trailer, I could make do with a small truck. I have found having anything with a bed has made home ownership on over 2 acres of land much easier.

 

[Nick1994]

I wish I could have a little Ranger. Good mpg and easy to park. Would be nice to run around town.

 

[apwillard1986]

We have sold quite a few of the new Colorado. The expectation is shifting in the market slightly. People now buy smaller trucks because they are easier to live with not because they are particularly cheaper. Compacts fell victim to a viscous cycle of manufacture marketing. As full size trucks supplanted the family car in popularity, production and profits rose and with them marketing and incentives. Despite the perceived demand for them; compacts simply stopped selling well because the incentivized full-size cut into their market share too deeply. As demand fell so did production and profits and incentives until you had a very limited true market for the product that no longer justified development.

 

[01rangerxl]

Originally Posted By: Silverado12

I wouldn't want to tow that much with this kind of truck. I had a Chevy Colorado, and the brakes and engine (2.9) were too small to tow my 3K lb. boat comfortably, and I couldn't see around the boat either in the mirrors.


Many of the small trucks in the rest of the world have small diesels, so they have more torque than a gas I4 for pulling things around.

But frontal area and weight are big factors too, and that's where a full size makes a much more comfortable tow vehicle with a larger trailer. You could get a 5.3 in a Colorado, but I wouldn't pull a camper with it. A utility trailer with a couple commercial mowers on it though? You bet.

 

[01rangerxl]

Originally Posted By: ls1mike
"Right sized" Is different for everyone.


Very true. I wasn't trying to imply that full size is "wrong sized" when I called the Colorado right sized. The manufacturers have been pushing for full size 1/2 tons to be the "one size fits all" truck, so it's good to see alternate options still out there.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted By: supton
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Because at the point you're considering scrapping your VW, a Vic is ready for another 150,000 miles!


I bet getting that extra 150k out of both vehicles will be similar in costs and effort. Getting almost any vehicle to go another 150k is a test of the owner's willingness to shoulder the cost and effort--any vehicle can have parts thrown at. Engine and transmission swap? Sure, why not? Got rust issues? That's what welders are for.

Some vehicles are cheaper to do repairs on. A Vic may well be that (almost certainly compared to a VW). But neither will go the distance without significant repairs. Clutches, automatic transmissions, injectors, O2 sensors...


I drove a livery Town Car with 580,000 miles...original engine, even the original AC compressor, alternator, and radiator. (Replacements were dated by the mechanic, these were not.) The AC blew cold, it tracked perfectly on the highway, all the electronics worked, the air suspension worked perfectly. Aside from valve seals around 200k, they hadnever been inside the engine. Serious question: could your Jetta manage another 275k in any way short of a full teardown and rebuild?

Note that 350-400k from a Panther car was the rule at that company, not the exception.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted By: Miller88
The factory leaf springs on my Cherokee were cracked. That was a surprising discovery when I went to replace them.

That was before I did any towing or hauling with it. One off road trip and it was sagging hard.


Not sure, but I THINK the 1997+ Cherokees had the rear springs softened. I know my 97 also sagged a bit, and it seemed softer in the back than older XJs I drove.

 

[Nick1994]

Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: supton
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Because at the point you're considering scrapping your VW, a Vic is ready for another 150,000 miles!


I bet getting that extra 150k out of both vehicles will be similar in costs and effort. Getting almost any vehicle to go another 150k is a test of the owner's willingness to shoulder the cost and effort--any vehicle can have parts thrown at. Engine and transmission swap? Sure, why not? Got rust issues? That's what welders are for.

Some vehicles are cheaper to do repairs on. A Vic may well be that (almost certainly compared to a VW). But neither will go the distance without significant repairs. Clutches, automatic transmissions, injectors, O2 sensors...


I drove a livery Town Car with 580,000 miles...original engine, even the original AC compressor, alternator, and radiator. (Replacements were dated by the mechanic, these were not.) The AC blew cold, it tracked perfectly on the highway, all the electronics worked, the air suspension worked perfectly. Aside from valve seals around 200k, they hadnever been inside the engine. Serious question: could your Jetta manage another 275k in any way short of a full teardown and rebuild?

Note that 350-400k from a Panther car was the rule at that company, not the exception.
Supton drives like 25k miles a year I think, in one year at 25 mpg and $2.50 a gallon a Crown Vic would cost $2,500. His Jetta at 45 mpg and $2.80 a gallon (diesel is usually like .30 more per gallon) is $1,555 per year. Close to $1,000 a year. If at these prices he put the 306,000 miles he has on his Jetta it would be $19,040 for the Jetta and $30,600 for the Crown Vic just in fuel.

 

[supton]

Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle

I drove a livery Town Car with 580,000 miles...original engine, even the original AC compressor, alternator, and radiator. (Replacements were dated by the mechanic, these were not.) The AC blew cold, it tracked perfectly on the highway, all the electronics worked, the air suspension worked perfectly. Aside from valve seals around 200k, they hadnever been inside the engine. Serious question: could your Jetta manage another 275k in any way short of a full teardown and rebuild?

Note that 350-400k from a Panther car was the rule at that company, not the exception.


Good question; I'm not sure. Will your Panther last 20 years of salty NH winters? That is how long it'd take for me to hit 500-600k. Also, you don't state how many transmissions it went through? Seems conventional wisdom indicates 150k on an automatic; are you beating by some significant factor?

As pointed out, fuel cost is not insignificant. Since my car is a depreciating asset that doesn't make me money, fuel cost vs replacement cost (depreciation?) also plays into it.

I honestly don't know. My cheapest option is to keep running my Jetta and fixing whatever breaks. That much I know. Every other option costs money, although keeping the Jetta may cost just as much (heater core? various body panels? etc).