JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,567
- 969
- 126
because you can rent a truck for $20/day from any of a number of agencies. i'd rather pay $20 the two times a year i need a truck, and not have to drive a lumbering, boring, gas-guzzling POS the rest of the entire year.
Dead3ye
Platinum Member
- Sep 21, 2000
- 2,917
- 1
- 81
Bah. If your only getting 12 MPG in a truck, you either have an oversized 3/4 or 1 ton pick up. 1/2 tons (which most homeowners would need) should be around 17 - 18 MPG with a decent size V8. This one gets me 17 MPG consistently. It has a 327 (5.3L for the metric folks) to boot. If that milage is no good for you, then get a 4 cyl. Toyota or something.
I could not live with out it. I'm am a serious outdoors person and I would say I use it as a truck at least once a week, and it hauls 18 loads of cut firewood a year. And newer trucks have really come around in the handling and ride performance.
I can fit a trio of mountain bikes into the trunk of my 1996 Integra. The rear seats need to be folded down, but I can fit them in.
VERY easy answer...
A trailer... can park it in the yard, kill some grass, and use it to move most things (better than a truck in some ccases)
A trailer... can park it in the yard, kill some grass, and use it to move most things (better than a truck in some ccases)
Got a 32" wide screen TV not too long ago and it fit likely in my the back of my 3doors ford focus.
merely as an example, your average volvo station wagon has MORE than 6 feet of cargo length with the tailgate down, can carry a 1/2 ton easily, and will kick the crap out of a truck in terms of safety, reliability, handling, fun-to-drive factor, resale value, and initial cost.
my parents use theirs to haul manure, drywall, plywood, pets, camping gear, bricks, stepping stones for the garden, furniture, etc... and it's a vacumn away from transporting the grandparents to a fancy resturant in relative luxury (and they didn't have to break their hips trying to climb into it).
my own wagon is smaller, but it carries nearly a 1/2 ton of band equipment on a regular basis, plus i've used it to move 3 times, and it will carry everything but my couch, desk, and bed ($20 truck rental solves that).
pickup trucks are simply the wrong vehicle for nearly everyone who buys them. but people will continue to buy them because they feel rugged and tough when they do, and because they make them feel "american." look at ornery getting all self-rightous about them. they're the AMERICAN thing to drive! anyone who drives anything else must be a complete pussy! right? right?
BTW, if everyone drove trucks, they wouldn't be any safer. you're worse off in a truck hitting another truck than a car/car crash just based on roll-over tendancies and the fact that now the vehicle has to bring 6000 pounds to an instant stop instead of 3000. anyone remember ford's complete failure to protect the passenger cage in recent truck crash-test pictures? i guess you could call trucks safer if you like not having knees anymore, but personally i'm fond of using my legs. and that was just for a single-vehicle collision (the majority of crashes). not to mention their sh!tty braking, sh!tty turning, sh!tty acceleration, and tendancy to roll-over at the drop of a hat.
call me crazy, but i think the vehicle that can't avoid an accident is the dangerous one. maybe it's no wonder that the europeans have lower crash-per-mile stats than we do.
Dead3ye
Platinum Member
- Sep 21, 2000
- 2,917
- 1
- 81
I would say that you should have the same opinion about SUV's.
Oh, and remind me not to ride in your parents car after they hauled the manure. That's gonna take more than a vacuum to clean up. It might even knock the resale value down a bit from the lingering stench.
Here's my take:
If you want to buy a truck, get one.
If you want to SUV, get one
If you want...well you get the idea.
There are plenty of useless vehicles running around on the road. Or should I say there are plenty of people driving vehicles not intended for what they were designed for.
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,567
- 969
- 126
I checked, they are rated at 14 city/18 highway. I also happen to know someone who owned a SCrew and he never got over 16mpg out of that thing with the 4.6l engine (which was woefully underpowered in that truck).
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,567
- 969
- 126
I had a '00 Toyota Tundra for 2.5 years and I averaged around 14-15mpg mostly city driving. It was a great truck and there are times I wish I still had it but I really didn't need a truck and the horrible gas mileage coupled with the PITA suicide rear doors and the birth of my son inspired me to trade it for a Nissan Maxima.
Edit-I've gotten by without a truck just fine. Oh, I do own a home.
Originally posted by: thomsbrain
merely as an example, your average volvo station wagon has MORE than 6 feet of cargo length with the tailgate down, can carry a 1/2 ton easily, and will kick the crap out of a truck in terms of safety, reliability, handling, fun-to-drive factor, resale value, and initial cost.
pickup trucks are simply the wrong vehicle for nearly everyone who buys them. but people will continue to buy them because they feel rugged and tough when they do, and because they make them feel "american." look at ornery getting all self-rightous about them. they're the AMERICAN thing to drive! anyone who drives anything else must be a complete pussy! right? right?
merely as an example, your average volvo station wagon has MORE than 6 feet of cargo length with the tailgate down, can carry a 1/2 ton easily, and will kick the crap out of a truck in terms of safety, reliability, handling, fun-to-drive factor, resale value, and initial cost.
- You putz! Volvo doesn't even make a RWD wagon anymore, and they're close to $30,000. An F-150 with a V8, is $5,000 cheaper, and a 2000 model has a private party resale value of $6,457 - $14,003. The Volvo is from $10,473 - $15,791.
- They get to break their bank when they have to fix it. For example, an alternator is $300.00. Only half that for the truck. The truck's rear wheel drive train is FAR cheaper to repair.
pickup trucks are simply the wrong vehicle for nearly everyone who buys them. but people will continue to buy them because they feel rugged and tough when they do, and because they make them feel "american." look at ornery getting all self-rightous about them. they're the AMERICAN thing to drive! anyone who drives anything else must be a complete pussy! right? right?
- You're not a pussy, just a dumbass with poor reading comprehension. Half the people in this country don't want a friggen FWD go-kart! The only alternative is a truck or SUV, save a couple full size cars by Ford. Blame your fellow econobox consumers, who forced Detroit to shift away from the tried & true, full size, RWD platform.
- When Heavy Meets Light
- "...So the statistics show. In 1996, 41,207 people died in traffic accidents, 35,579 of them within their vehicles. Crashes between LTVs and cars resulted in 5,259 fatalities. Of these, 81 percent, or 4,260 fatalities, occurred in the cars. Clearly, the passengers in the larger vehicles came out ahead. But that doesn?t make the LTVs the villains of the piece. Because it?s not just the mismatch in size that makes cars less safe. Fatal crashes between two cars caused 4,013 deaths, while LTV-LTV crashes resulted in far fewer fatalities: 1,225. Even if we correct for the difference in the numbers of each type of vehicle on the road, it seems obvious that if everyone drove an LTV, far fewer bodies would be hauled off the nation?s highways every year..."
SHOPPING FOR A SAFER CAR
- Vehicle size and weight are important characteristics that influence crashworthiness. The laws of physics dictate that, all else being equal, larger and heavier vehicles are safer than smaller and lighter ones. In relation to their numbers on the road, small cars have more than twice as many occupant deaths each year as large cars.
Size and weight are closely related. Large vehicles typically are heavy, and small ones are light. But these two characteristics don't influence crashworthiness the same way. Vehicle size can protect you in both single- and two-vehicle collisions because larger vehicles usually have longer crush zones, which help prevent damage to the safety cage and lower the crash forces inside it.
Vehicle weight protects you principally in two-vehicle crashes. In a head-on crash, for example, the heavier vehicle drives the lighter one backwards, which decreases forces inside the heavy vehicle and increases forces in the lighter one. All heavy vehicles, even poorly designed ones, offer this advantage in two-vehicle collisions but may not offer good protection in single-vehicle crashes.
- Call ME crazy, but I'd rather be in the larger vehicle in a two vehicle accident! Too bad the only large vehicles available are trucks.
But, don't worry, proper haulers are making a comeback! :thumbsup:
I Love my truck!!!!!!!!!! I also love the bumper sticker "Yes this is my truck and... NO I CAN"T HELP YOU MOVE!!!!!!!!!!!"
Same here, just because I have a truck doesn't mean I have the time or desire to help people move.
I recommend they go to U-Haul and rent a nice one.
Just replaced my old one. Wife said we could get a third car if we wanted for me but she still wants a truck of some sort. It can come in handy.
Originally posted by: Toasthead
I love my truck...but now that we have a baby, I might need to trade it in...for a BIGGER truck..
I will never give up my truck!
The bigger the better. Not only can you haul more stuff, but it also really pisses off the Birkenstock wearing environmental kooks.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter