Right or wrong...It is Ford vs Chevy,vs GMC etc... Not corporate totals as you well know.
Ford vs. GM full size trucks.
- Thread starter stchman
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2010
- Messages
- 9,807
Originally Posted By: BikeWhisperer
I've owned both (I don't buy into the Chevy vs Ford thing...I buy what I like based on many factors).
Fully agree--for me 1991, 1992, 1993, and 2003 were GMs, 1996 was Dodge, and 1999 and 2010 were Fords. While everyone has their preference, I can unequivocally say they ALL have their issues in some shape or fashion.
Originally Posted By: BikeWhisperer
I think aluminum is going to become more common in all vehicles as less weight means more MPG (lighter vehicle plus smaller displacement engines). The cost of production and repairs will come down as more companies adopt it. Whether Ford wins as an early adopter or loses is yet to be seen.
Agree here too! As the CAFE regulations become tighter (and harder to reach) smaller turbo engines and lighter body materials will be the status quo. Frankly, while I can understand the need for emissions controls, Europe's engines make more HP and get better MPG and I do not see acid rain falling all over western Europe. Are we too critical on emissions thereby reducing the overall MPG/HP of the fleets?
I've owned both (I don't buy into the Chevy vs Ford thing...I buy what I like based on many factors).
Fully agree--for me 1991, 1992, 1993, and 2003 were GMs, 1996 was Dodge, and 1999 and 2010 were Fords. While everyone has their preference, I can unequivocally say they ALL have their issues in some shape or fashion.
Originally Posted By: BikeWhisperer
I think aluminum is going to become more common in all vehicles as less weight means more MPG (lighter vehicle plus smaller displacement engines). The cost of production and repairs will come down as more companies adopt it. Whether Ford wins as an early adopter or loses is yet to be seen.
Agree here too! As the CAFE regulations become tighter (and harder to reach) smaller turbo engines and lighter body materials will be the status quo. Frankly, while I can understand the need for emissions controls, Europe's engines make more HP and get better MPG and I do not see acid rain falling all over western Europe. Are we too critical on emissions thereby reducing the overall MPG/HP of the fleets?
Originally Posted By: tenderloin
Right or wrong...It is Ford vs Chevy,vs GMC etc... Not corporate totals as you well know.
Who says? GM is one company and cares about their total sales and bottom line. Who makes the rules that you can't combine Chevy and GMC?
Right or wrong...It is Ford vs Chevy,vs GMC etc... Not corporate totals as you well know.
Who says? GM is one company and cares about their total sales and bottom line. Who makes the rules that you can't combine Chevy and GMC?
Originally Posted By: stchman
The bailouts were to have the UAW employees keep their jobs.
The real reason is the USA can not afford to loose the manufacturing capabilities. Those same assembly lines will roll off what ever our military needs if a war dictates it.
The bailouts were to have the UAW employees keep their jobs.
The real reason is the USA can not afford to loose the manufacturing capabilities. Those same assembly lines will roll off what ever our military needs if a war dictates it.
Well, I just got a new 2015 Ford F-150 extended cab( I guess that's what it is, it has backseats) 4x4. Its a company truck. It has the 3.5 Tri-V motor. No Eco-boost-Company truck. Its pretty well loaded with everything. First thing my son said was, Nice Full size 4x4 Pick-up truck with a Nissan Altima engine. I love Ford marketing though, even though the engine is 283 hp and the 3.7 last year was 300 hp. They lightened the truck enough to call it a 5% improvement in weight to horsepower ratio. But really how many people actually buy a truck and use it as one?
Like a guy told me in the 3/4 truck sales. Everybody wants a Dodge for the motor (Cummins) Everybody wants a Chevy for the transmission (Allison) and Everybody wants to pay the Ford price. I think it made sense.
Originally Posted By: Panzerman
Like a guy told me in the 3/4 truck sales. Everybody wants a Dodge for the motor (Cummins) Everybody wants a Chevy for the transmission (Allison) and Everybody wants to pay the Ford price. I think it made sense.
That is a fact!
Like a guy told me in the 3/4 truck sales. Everybody wants a Dodge for the motor (Cummins) Everybody wants a Chevy for the transmission (Allison) and Everybody wants to pay the Ford price. I think it made sense.
That is a fact!
I've owned all three, they all have their ups and downs. I prefer GM's LS engine to a modular, and I prefer the Hemi over the modular as well.
I've owned several modulars that have gone into high mileage, as company trucks, so I won't diss them completely. They just don't make as usable power as a pushrod small block. IMO, the power a modular makes is soft compared to a small block. After 4k RPM it's a dead heat. They also eat up ignition coils, and they are generally noisy running engines.
I like them all. It all comes down to how they are maintained if we are all honest.
I've owned several modulars that have gone into high mileage, as company trucks, so I won't diss them completely. They just don't make as usable power as a pushrod small block. IMO, the power a modular makes is soft compared to a small block. After 4k RPM it's a dead heat. They also eat up ignition coils, and they are generally noisy running engines.
I like them all. It all comes down to how they are maintained if we are all honest.
Last edited:
All new trucks are ugly and to expensive.
I don't get the aluminum thing, the frame will still rot out on you and if you scale them the new F150's are about the same as the Chevy's, Ram's weigh a bit more.
I personally think Ram makes the least ugly truck out their.
Trucks are heavy because they are loaded up with [censored] to make them drive like luxury vehicles. Now everyone wants to be able to tow massive loads and they want to be able to accelerate up hills while doing it, hence you need 400hp. Fuel economy tanks.
If they built them like they did in the 90's except with modern technology, IE simple, low to the ground, light, 250hp, etc. Trucks would be cheap, get great fuel mileage and only contractors would buy them. So that's not going to happen.
I don't get the aluminum thing, the frame will still rot out on you and if you scale them the new F150's are about the same as the Chevy's, Ram's weigh a bit more.
I personally think Ram makes the least ugly truck out their.
Trucks are heavy because they are loaded up with [censored] to make them drive like luxury vehicles. Now everyone wants to be able to tow massive loads and they want to be able to accelerate up hills while doing it, hence you need 400hp. Fuel economy tanks.
If they built them like they did in the 90's except with modern technology, IE simple, low to the ground, light, 250hp, etc. Trucks would be cheap, get great fuel mileage and only contractors would buy them. So that's not going to happen.
Last edited:
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: stchman
Originally Posted By: pbm
I would rather buy a truck from a company that didn't take a government BAILOUT than one that did. The taxpayers (us) lost on that deal....
Ford took government money ($5.9B in June 2009) as well, so they are not as innocent as you think they are.
Ford didn't go bankrupt and that wasn't a bailout, it was a "green initiative" loan, one which Ford has already paid back. Nissan was part of the same program as were a number of other marques.
Originally Posted By: pbm
I would rather buy a truck from a company that didn't take a government BAILOUT than one that did. The taxpayers (us) lost on that deal....
Ford took government money ($5.9B in June 2009) as well, so they are not as innocent as you think they are.
Ford didn't go bankrupt and that wasn't a bailout, it was a "green initiative" loan, one which Ford has already paid back. Nissan was part of the same program as were a number of other marques.
Majority of the diesel performance guys in my area are going to 6.0 Fords due to the strength of the 5r110 torque shift. It's cheaper to fix the engine issues on a 6.0 than build up the transmissions on the other makes is what they're saying. Of course engine wise the cummins is the cheapest/easiest to make the big power from.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: itguy08
That is a surprise as from what I read the 6.0 has plenty of issues that cost big bucks to fix.
Delete the EGR (which is cheap and easy) and if you don't have a post '05, you might want to upgrade the head studs.
There are other issues that can pop up (like the branch tube adapter and the IDM) but generally the biggest issues are the EGR setup and the head studs/bolts.
As noted, the 5R110 is absolutely bulletproof; a truly fantastic tranny. And the trucks themselves are also excellent.
That is a surprise as from what I read the 6.0 has plenty of issues that cost big bucks to fix.
Delete the EGR (which is cheap and easy) and if you don't have a post '05, you might want to upgrade the head studs.
There are other issues that can pop up (like the branch tube adapter and the IDM) but generally the biggest issues are the EGR setup and the head studs/bolts.
As noted, the 5R110 is absolutely bulletproof; a truly fantastic tranny. And the trucks themselves are also excellent.
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
Originally Posted By: tenderloin
Right or wrong...It is Ford vs Chevy,vs GMC etc... Not corporate totals as you well know.
Who says? GM is one company and cares about their total sales and bottom line. Who makes the rules that you can't combine Chevy and GMC?
A Chevy is a Chevy..a GMC is a GMC.. Simple. When GM had the Pontiac did folks combine the Firebird sales with the Camaro? Usually not.. Then Ford could throw in the Cougar. Very similar cars but they ARE different. Same with the trucks
Originally Posted By: tenderloin
Right or wrong...It is Ford vs Chevy,vs GMC etc... Not corporate totals as you well know.
Who says? GM is one company and cares about their total sales and bottom line. Who makes the rules that you can't combine Chevy and GMC?
A Chevy is a Chevy..a GMC is a GMC.. Simple. When GM had the Pontiac did folks combine the Firebird sales with the Camaro? Usually not.. Then Ford could throw in the Cougar. Very similar cars but they ARE different. Same with the trucks
Trucks are trucks. Most brands are nearly interchangeable.
When shopping last year we drove the big 3, all were nice. But the RAM suited our needs best.
In our fleet we still use GM products exclusively due to great resale and longevity as well as our Factory Authorized Upfitter's recommendations.
Speaking strictly as a fleet mechanic I say simplest is the best. My wife would say creature comforts. You have to pick what works for you...
When shopping last year we drove the big 3, all were nice. But the RAM suited our needs best.
In our fleet we still use GM products exclusively due to great resale and longevity as well as our Factory Authorized Upfitter's recommendations.
Speaking strictly as a fleet mechanic I say simplest is the best. My wife would say creature comforts. You have to pick what works for you...
We bought a new Silverado a year ago. Nice truck. It's our 3rd generation GM truck and they keep getting better and better each year. We test drove an F150 (both an Ecoboost and a 5.0) and also a Ram. I liked them all and would have gladly bought any of the 3. They all had their pros and cons, but my wife loves Chevy. All three get the job done with slight nuances.
- Status
