PDA

View Full Version : Some advice and opinions please.



M.Metz
07-12-2007, 08:46 AM
I know this has nothing to do with reenacting, well in a small wayit does. I am in need of purchasing my first brand new vehicle. My truck is dying and with out a reliable transportation I wont be going to many reenactments. After I bought a lemon last time I refuse to buy a used truck. I have narrowed my selection down to three trucks. I would like some advice and or opinions on each of these three: Chevrolet, Colorado; Ford, Ranger; or a Nissan, Frontier. I do not wish to start the war on which truck is better. I just wish for some advice or personal experiences some of you might have had.

Thank you for you time,
Mike

huntdaw
07-12-2007, 12:53 PM
"I know this has nothing to do with reenacting"

You're right. Test drive them and buy whatever you like best.

M.Metz
07-12-2007, 01:45 PM
I was hoping to get more information other than what I have read on thier websites and what dealers tell me. You cant test drive a vehicle for years on end.

Poor Private
07-12-2007, 02:15 PM
Personally I owned a ford ranger 90 bought it new and the engine puked at 125k. rode ok was a v6 got decent milage for the time. If you eveer have to have one of the engines (v6) rebuilt better to trash out, they have continous oil pressure issues after that.
Now I think i would look into buying the small dodge, or the toyota.
Good luck in your search.

rebelyell62
07-12-2007, 04:23 PM
I've owned Fords, Chevys, and GMC's (full size P.U's)
All gave me good service. But with that said, I am a FORD man dyed in the wool.

The key to keeping a vehicle on the road is maintainence, oil, filters,brakes, bearings, fluids,belts. You get the picture.

Good luck in your decision.
Wendell Brown

Graves Mercantile
07-12-2007, 04:34 PM
If you are looking for a compact pickup I'd reccomend the toyota. They make the best cars in America and my Toyota tacoma has 150K+ and still going strong. Great trucks.

I'm a FORD man too.....for full size. The ranger STINKS. Underpowered and slow on the road. Don't waste your time.

I've had 5 Chevy S-10's and they are lost compression and dumped coolant in the oil. Great trucks until that happened.

Good luck.

rick35ovi
07-12-2007, 06:54 PM
We were just discussing this over the fourth at an event we were at, A tow truck driver in the unit said the only truck he would own is the ford f150, He tows less of them than any other truck out there!!
As for the chevy colorado, It is a inline five cylinder engine with a lot of torque but still fairly new, haven't heard much about problems with them.
Nissan is o.k. but doesnt have the resale value a Toyota would have and not quite as reliable.
The Ranger has been around for ever but in my opinion is too small and a little underpowered unless you get the v6.
I personaly am leasing a 2006 f150 crewcab 4x4 and it is the best truck i have ever owned, I have had ford trucks for over 15years now and haven't had a major problem yet!! (knock on wood).
Bottom line is What are you looking for, Gas mileage or gear hauler? The f150 i have now gets pretty decent mileage for a full size truck and i can pretty much haul anything i would want to.
Good luck on your search!!
Let Us Know What You Get, Just Curious!

Micah Trent
07-12-2007, 07:26 PM
Of the three trucks you are looking at, I would take in the consideration of which vehicle has better miles to the gallon, the way gas prices are anymore.:rolleyes:
Good luck on your pickings!

jurgitemvaletem
07-12-2007, 07:54 PM
That would be the Frontier by far.

WestTN_reb
07-12-2007, 10:26 PM
As an earlier gentleman stated, instead of the Ford, look to the small Dodge.
My dad, my brother, and myself all own Dodge Dakota trucks. My truck has had an engine rebuild, but it still runs fine at 275,000 miles. The manual transmission has never been touched, except to change a clutch. My brother's truck is barely over 100,000 miles, so it dosen't count. My dad's truck is a marvel though. At 301,000 miles, the most extensive repair work it has had done to it was a radiator replacement. The engine and transmission have never been touched.:shock:

Just my humble suggestion.

M.Metz
07-13-2007, 09:45 AM
I wish to extend many thanks to everyone for their input. I have been doing a lot of research on each vehicle, but somethings can only be told by people who have had that vehicle.

Thanks you again,

Mike

Suppelsa
07-13-2007, 10:26 AM
In my (100% biased Michigan opinion) go with the Ford.

Chris Suppelsa

KarinTimour
07-13-2007, 12:04 PM
I'd go scope out what Consumer Reports has to say on the issue. I use them for all major purchases, and they often are testing features or checking out things that I hadn't considered.

Sometimes you can't get the exact model they tested by the time the report is out, but other times you can get the same exact item by shopping around. Has saved me tons of expense and aggravation.

Sincerely,
Karin Timour
Period Knitting -- Socks, Sleeping Hats and Balaclavas
Come see me at September Storm -- I'll have the sock line with me.
Atlantic Guard Soldiers' Aid Society
Email: Ktimour@aol.com

bob 125th nysvi
07-13-2007, 12:41 PM
does have an agenda like everybody else and has even lost a court case over their vehicle tests.

I guess I'd question why a pickup at all if reenacting is the prime consideration. You'll get as much gear in an SUV and it will be more versatile.

What are your other needs for the truck? That's what should really drive what you are looking for. ANy other specific advice is nothing more than persoanl preferences.

I love my F350 diesel dually (which I bought used) but then I tow draft horses I need a ton of power. My brother drives a Ram loves it and I've always loved my Chryslers.

Wouldn't take a ford ranger if you gave it to me or any other mid-size for that matter. Might as well jump right up to full size.

KarinTimour
07-14-2007, 07:12 AM
Dear Bob:

You wrote:

"[Consumers Reports] ....does have an agenda like everybody else ..."

Ok, I'll bite -- what is their agenda from your perspective?

I didin't know about the court case, and went googling this morning to find something about it. I cut and pasted the information I found below, for those of you who are interested.

The short version (my understaning of the below) is that they were testing SUVs to see how easily they roll over. This has been a continuing vehicle design problem for SUVs over the years, and some would argue make them less safe vehicles overall. Most manufacturers have had their engineering talent working on ways to lower their particular SUV's roll over potential and quite a few of them have radically improved.

Consumers Reports was testing by using drivers on a particular obstacle course. Ran the course multiple times with different SUVs. No rollovers. On the 47th time through the course, the Samari rolled over. They then shortened the course and tried to maximize the rollover chances. Again, they test products to the point of failure to see if that is different between different products. And intentionally tried to get the Samari to roll. They also ran the other cars through the same tests and also tried to get them to roll. Samari rolled more often than the others, so they gave it "unacceptable" rating. For those of you who haven't read Consumer Reports before, when they rate something they also explain how they tested the product, so you can judge for yourself whether you though the tests were appropriate or not.

Long story short, Suzuki filed suit that the tests were unfair and that Consumer Reports disparraged their product. This case was just heard in the Court of Appeals (see below) and 13 of the 24 judges upheld the finding that CU was disparraging. However, there was a strongly worded dissent by the other 11 judges who felt that CU's testing methods ARE to try and get a product to fail so that they can see where the safety limits for each lie. They will be taking it to the Supreme Court in the meantime.


Longer version cut and pasted from the Gannett site:

FROM BARBARA WARTELLE WALL: LEGAL WATCH
Federal Appeals Court Refuses To Rehear Consumer Reports Case
Despite a strong dissent from several judges, a federal appeals court recently declined to rehear a case in which a panel of three of its judges had earlier decided that the publisher of a consumer safety report could be liable for product disparagement if it designed a test to make the product fail and did not re-examine its testing procedure after its methods were criticized. (Suzuki Motor Corp. v. Consumers Union of United States, Inc., May 19, 2003.) The controversy surrounding the latest decision in this long-running case and the vigorous dissent could lead to further review by the U.S. Supreme Court.

As reported in Legal Watch, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held last year that Consumers Union (CU) could be liable for asserting that the Suzuki Samurai tipped over more easily than other sport utility vehicles. (Suzuki Motor Corp. v. Consumers Union of United States, Inc., June 25, 2002.) CU then asked the entire Ninth Circuit to rehear the case. (Parties who are dissatisfied with a decision by a federal appeals court panel are entitled to request review by all the judges who sit on that circuit.) In the latest decision, that request was rejected by 13 of the 24 judges voting. The 11 remaining judges joined a strongly worded dissent written by Judge Alex Kozinski.

CU first tested the safety of the Samurai in 1988 on an accident avoidance course it had used for many years. Three drivers took the Samurai through the course 46 times without incident, but it tipped up on two wheels the 47th time. CU then designed a shorter course to replicate the conditions that caused the Samurai to tip up, and the Samurai again tipped after several runs. A number of other SUVs put through the shorter course did not tip.

In July 1988, CU published an article that described the tests it had conducted, concluded that the Samurai is "unfit for its intended use" because it is "so likely to roll over" during an accident avoidance maneuver and gave it a "Not Acceptable" rating. During the next several years, CU published multiple references to the rating.

Suzuki sued CU for product disparagement, alleging that the repeated references to the rating falsely suggested that Samurais tipped over more easily than did other SUVs. The rating was flawed, Suzuki argued, because CU employees had encouraged test drivers to roll the vehicle and had expressed approval and delight when it finally did roll.

In California, a product disparagement claim requires proof that the publisher made the disparaging statements with "actual malice," that is, knowing they are false or with reckless disregard of their truth or falsity. A publisher acts with reckless disregard if it "actually had a high degree of awareness of probable falsity," or purposefully avoided learning the truth despite "obvious reasons to doubt the accuracy of the story."

The three-judge panel -- whose decision still stands -- had concluded that "the timing of the course modification" and "the fact that the Suzuki was tested until it tipped" suggested that CU "rigged" the test "in order to cause a rollover." Evidence that CU needed to boost revenues through a "blockbuster story" lent credence to the allegation of rigging, the court also found. In addition, the panel said that CU's failure to examine its testing methods after a government safety agency said that certain aspects of those tests were flawed could constitute evidence that it purposefully avoided learning that its rating was inaccurate.

Judge Kozinki strongly criticized the panel's reasoning in his dissent. CU based its opinion -- the rating of the Samurai as "Not Acceptable" -- on testing methods that it fully described in the article. The First Amendment protects the publication of opinions based on disclosed facts, so the panel's decision must be incorrect, he argued.

Moreover, changing its test to better detect rollover risk in increasingly popular SUVs "is precisely what one would expect from researchers seriously interested in consumer safety," Judge Kozinski said. "CU's switch is not even bad science, let alone bad journalism, and certainly not journalism so awful that it loses First Amendment protection," he added.

Judge Kozinski also argued that CU's decision not to alter its testing procedures following criticism does not demonstrate actual malice because there is long-running debate about which methods test rollover propensity most effectively. And he voiced concern that the panel's decision will result in the suppression of consumer reports relied on by the public for information vital to health and safety.

CU is expected to ask the Supreme Court to review the decision, which may be more inclined to hear such an argument in light of the large number of dissenting votes in the Ninth Circuit. Were the court to agree to hear the case, it would be the first press defamation case to reach the Supreme Court in 12 years.


Karin Timour
Period Knitting -- Socks, Sleeping Hats, Balaclavas
Come see me at September Storm -- I'll have the sock line with me!
Atlantic Guard Soldiers' Aid Society
Email: Ktimour@aol.com

toptimlrd
07-14-2007, 08:45 AM
There have been numerous instances in the past of CU using improper testing procedures but often CU feels they are immune to criticism about such. Some examples I know of:

In the early 1990s, CU tested tires for wet weather traction and braking. The way tires are tested for this normally is on a specially prepared course with a sprinkler system that puts down a very even layer of water that is computer monitored so that there are no spots deeper than others. When CU replicated this test they had the cars follow a water truck that was simply dumping water on the pavement so that there was a possibility of puddling and uneven water application. When the tests were done, Michelin had their highway rib tire (for those of you old enough to remember these they were very quiet and long lasting but horrendous in the wet stuff) outperform their best all season tire in wet weather braking.....something that was scientifically impossible. CU never retracted the story or test to my knowledge.

Not too many years ago CU also tested a product which I am very familiar with. The "independent" lab they used was operated by a former corporate officer of one of our rival companies. For years on end this product always outperformed the competition in their reports.....until that year when the list of manufacturers was actually completely reversed in the results with ..... you guessed it the company that the lab operator formally ran came out on top. After several complaints from the manufacturers they switched the following year and things went back to normal. Now more recently a new technology was developed that the old methodologies for testing will not work on. CU was informed of this and sure enough, they used the old test procedures. After a couple of years of this they have finally agreed to use the more modern testing method but only time will tell.

Add to this that often when CU puts out new test results, they don't test everything in the article but use previous years tests for the rankings. This has also led to problems where companies have made improvements and changes to their items but are ranked on an earlier model.

To be honest, I have become very sceptical of Consumer Reports and only use it as one guideline when looking at items. I do much more research through companies such as JD Power, on-line comment boards, etc (all depends on the product I am looking at). For one last example, in a recent Consumer Reports where a product was ranked, one item we made for one retailer scored very high and was a "best buy", the very same product under a different label (for a different retailer) scored very low. The difference in these products? The sticker on it.

Graves Mercantile
07-14-2007, 06:32 PM
I'm confused.......how does using sprinklers actually replicate real world conditions? It sounds like CR used a testing method that would replicate puddles, dry patches and other phenomenon that occur on actual roads. I'm not defending CR, but your example does not.....hold water. (pun intended)



In the early 1990s, CU tested tires for wet weather traction and braking. The way tires are tested for this normally is on a specially prepared course with a sprinkler system that puts down a very even layer of water that is computer monitored so that there are no spots deeper than others. When CU replicated this test they had the cars follow a water truck that was simply dumping water on the pavement so that there was a possibility of puddling and uneven water application. When the tests were done, Michelin had their highway rib tire (for those of you old enough to remember these they were very quiet and long lasting but horrendous in the wet stuff) outperform their best all season tire in wet weather braking.....something that was scientifically impossible. CU never retracted the story or test to my knowledge.

TNCivilian
07-15-2007, 05:16 PM
Mike --

I bought a 1989 F-150 new with 7 miles on it ( most from my test drive), and used it for re-enacting from October 1988 to August 1997. Of course I had to replace things like the alternator, starter, and battery, but that wasn't until after I passed 100,000 miles. I actually got 125,000 miles from the original battery. Alternator went a week later.

I didn't think it was going to pass MA's Safety Inspection in 2002, so I donated it to Special Olympics with 162,000 miles on it. Still had the original clutch, too. I've missed it every day since. Sure would've come in handy moving down to TN, I can tell you.

Outside of general maintainence, I never had any major trouble in the 13 years I had it.

If it was my choice, I'd upgrade to the F-150. Hope this is some help.

Steve

M.Metz
07-15-2007, 06:23 PM
Can we please get back onto topic. Im not trying to be a horse's butt but I was asking about specific vehicles and how they perform, not how they are tested by a third party. If you would like to discuss testing firms please do so in another thread.

I have owned used Fords since I was old enough to drive. They all had problems, but I owe that to the age of the vehicle. My current truck is falling appart. I bought a lemon. It looked nice, was a really good offer, and seemed to be solid when we test drove it. After having it for a few months small things started to go wrong. Upon working on the truck I have realized the truck was burried in a mud bog or river, I am from the back hills of West Virginia after all. Im trying to have an unbiased opinion on what I choose. My best friend just bought a new colorado so I will drive his and see how it runs and how well he likes it.

bob 125th nysvi
07-17-2007, 07:17 AM
Can we please get back onto topic. Im not trying to be a horse's butt but I was asking about specific vehicles and how they perform, not how they are tested by a third party. If you would like to discuss testing firms please do so in another thread.

Where the reality is once you started a thread that is the LAST time you controlled the conversation and its direction.

The only way to control conversations down here is to start your own forum.

Or be a moderator! (Sorry Tom & Sgt. Pepper!)

sbl
07-17-2007, 07:56 AM
TNCivilian

Top 10 Top Lesbian Cars 2006
From Kathy Belge,
Your Guide to Lesbian Life.


7. Ford F-150 Pickup Truck
Lesbian love trucks. And it's not just to save money on U-haul. The Ford F-150 pickup is perfect for those frequent trips to Home Depot or weekend soccer tournaments. Despite their little slip this year, Ford has consistently supported the gay and lesbian community and its GLBT employees. It was one of the few companies to earn 100 on the Human Rights Campaign Corporate Equity Index. This is a truck you can buy with pride.

Sgt_Pepper
07-17-2007, 08:05 AM
The only way to control conversations down here is to start your own forum.

There's no guarantee even then :)


Or be a moderator! (Sorry Tom & Sgt. Pepper!)

Ditto :D

Graves Mercantile
07-17-2007, 11:12 AM
That's good to know! I've been a lesbian my entire life and now it makes sense why I've always loved the F150.



TNCivilian

Top 10 Top Lesbian Cars 2006
From Kathy Belge,
Your Guide to Lesbian Life.


7. Ford F-150 Pickup Truck
Lesbian love trucks. And it's not just to save money on U-haul. The Ford F-150 pickup is perfect for those frequent trips to Home Depot or weekend soccer tournaments. Despite their little slip this year, Ford has consistently supported the gay and lesbian community and its GLBT employees. It was one of the few companies to earn 100 on the Human Rights Campaign Corporate Equity Index. This is a truck you can buy with pride.

sbl
07-17-2007, 12:10 PM
My son informed me that my Ford Focus wagon is "lesbian". (It's really a "mom mobile.") I had to check on the "internets" about this and I remembered the top ten list when I read about the Ford 150.

One of my cousins is the "L word" but I haven't gotten her comment on this subject yet.

bob 125th nysvi
07-17-2007, 12:47 PM
That's good to know! I've been a lesbian my entire life and now it makes sense why I've always loved the F150.

way waaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too much information and not a picture I want in my head.

Actually I thought the Subaru was the official female car of the Lambda.

At least that's what my lesbian friend tells me.

LadyReb
07-17-2007, 02:43 PM
I wish to extend many thanks to everyone for their input. I have been doing a lot of research on each vehicle, but somethings can only be told by people who have had that vehicle.

Thanks you again,

Mike

I am totally GM. I had a Chevy Lumina 4 door sedan that ran out of room for my reenacting gear plus my husband's so I traded it for an HHR in Nov 2005. I have never been sorry. You can let the back seats down to accomodate more cargo and it gets 29 MPG highway miles. Check it out.

Graves Mercantile
07-17-2007, 04:01 PM
way waaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too much information and not a picture I want in my head.

Actually I thought the Subaru was the official female car of the Lambda.

At least that's what my lesbian friend tells me.

Wouldn't it make sense? I've always been attracted to women. I'm just a lesbian in a man's body.

flattop32355
07-17-2007, 08:17 PM
Men who want to be women who want to be men, on the next Oprah.

Spinster
07-17-2007, 10:50 PM
PPSSSFFFTTTTTTT

Scott owes me a keyboard.

Last month, Darling Daughter was grumping about her Ford Taurus and her hopes of getting a new vehicle as soon as she starts work after graduation. Since the old vehicle was new when she started grad school, I think that she'll figure out its not as easy as it looks when she goes to buy one.

At any rate, I asked her what she wanted the new vehicle to Do. Always a better question than what model you want. She mentioned the various capacities of a pickup truck and then said "I really wanted a pickup when I got the Taurus, but Grandmother said only lesbians drive pickup trucks."

And now Scott seems to have confirmed that notion.

And back to our original poster---get a full sized Ford if a truck is what you need. Up until about a year ago, I was running a fleet with 85 of them. We looked and experimented with a lot of other trucks, and these were cheaper to maintain and required less of it.

Given Mama's assessment though, maybe I better sell you my pickup :smile:

sbl
07-18-2007, 04:26 AM
"And back to our original poster---get a full sized Ford if a truck is what you need."

Mrs Lawson has a good point. I've seen a lot of guys in my area get a pick up truck and start a small business. They're great for transporting lobster traps , tools, or land scaping eguipment, and picking up bait or taking stuff to the dump. You can clean them up for going on dates. I've never needed one because I just commute but the Focus Wagon can hold all my CW/WBTS gear and rifle plus I can sleep in it if i have to. Pick Up trucks would be great for that with a cap or a tool locker.

BTW, lesbians can make wonderful friends as they often like the same things men like.

M.Metz
07-18-2007, 07:20 AM
Like I said before I live in West Virginia. A lot of straight girls prefer a pickup truck. They are not lesbians, but country girls. Ive seen women in a jacked up silverado that would run my mid-size over. The sad thing is they probably did most of the work on them.

sbl
07-18-2007, 07:54 AM
"country girls" Yes we have ladies like that too on the coast. Good with boats. My brother married one of them.

Did you see the female fishing boat operator in "The Perfect Storm?"


Good luck with the truck.

31stWisconsin
07-19-2007, 08:37 PM
I work for a landscaping business. In the past year, I have witnessed a Ford F250 die (but with 550,000 miles on it, take that as you may) a Ford F350 blow oil gaskets and catch on fire, and a Ford F250 blow a valve. Yet Ford is the only thing my boss uses for big trucks, because they don't make Toyotas big enough.

However, he has a Tundra and that thing a tough little truck. It's beat all to **** and it still works pretty decently. I would strongly consider a Toyota or a Ford.

Ephraim_Zook
07-23-2007, 01:34 PM
FWIW -- Back in 1995 I bought a '96 Toyota Tacoma, new. Nearly 12 years later, it has 396,700 miles on it. Original engine. Original clutch. Original paint (mostly). Between hitting 3 deer over the years and getting rear-ended twice, it's probably two inches shorter than it was when I bought it. :-)

Downside: The upholstery is getting tired (but no holes yet). The AC stopped working a few years ago. The power steering pump just went, which is no big deal. It drives fine with "armstrong" power steering -- just requires some extra effort in parking lots and other slow-speed turn areas.

regards
Ron "saddle-sore" Myzie
The 638,426 klick mess

sbl
07-23-2007, 03:09 PM
If I could change Detroit (automobile industry in general) I'd bring back side window vents. Those were "Yankee AC".

CandaceRose
07-23-2007, 05:14 PM
I used to own a 1989 Chevy Silverado pickup. (NO, I'm not a lesbian but a girl who lives in the middle of Indiana farm country) I put well over 500,000 miles on the original engine before setting it out to pasture. It only needed minor replacement parts during its 15 years on the road- tires, wiper blades, turn signal lamps, transmission(s), drive shaft(s), cooling system, fuel system. But never the engine! :-)

I now drive a Chevy Malibu Maxx and have a love/hate relationship with it. It has a hatchback and screams MIDDLE AGED LADY when going down the road. ICK Anyway, nothing will ever last as good as that Chevy pickup did.

Claude Sinclair
07-23-2007, 05:17 PM
I know this has nothing to do with reenacting, well in a small wayit does. I am in need of purchasing my first brand new vehicle. My truck is dying and with out a reliable transportation I wont be going to many reenactments. After I bought a lemon last time I refuse to buy a used truck. I have narrowed my selection down to three trucks. I would like some advice and or opinions on each of these three: Chevrolet, Colorado; Ford, Ranger; or a Nissan, Frontier. I do not wish to start the war on which truck is better. I just wish for some advice or personal experiences some of you might have had.

Thank you for you time,
Mike


I drive a Dodge Neon. Can pack three reenactors and gear. We travel lite and get 32 mpg as a bonus.

Claude Sinclair

NoahBriggs
07-25-2007, 12:55 PM
Out of the two consecutive Ford Rangers I owned, one lost its transmission at around 112k miles. The other was bought used at 240k miles, and it had transmission problems, and leaking oil caused the spark plugs to zap intermittently. It, too finally conked out on me. Cannot comment on the other brands. I no longer drive trucks; just Hondas or Toyotas because they get good gas mileage and have terrific maintenance records.

Test drive whatever gives you the best gas mileage. Skip the SUVs.

captdougofky
07-31-2007, 08:10 AM
I drive a Ford 350 crew cab 4x4 with the diesel engine, its a great truck pulls cannons fine. I'm going to drive it till the wheels come off. I give more for that truck than I sold my first house for. Great truck pricey. If you don't need a big truck don't buy one they are a pain to drive in the city. I live in the country so its not to bad. On smaller trucks look to Japan the quality is hard to beat.

Always
Doug Thomas
Lyons Battery CS
Kentucky

StonewallBrigade
08-09-2007, 11:24 PM
I have a '98 Nissan Frontier and it is excellent...got me to Gettysburg and back on many occasions. I hate to say it but Japanese vehicles are more reliable than US made cars.