Cheap tow vehicle

It's looking like I may need to pick up a work truck do to a new house we are looking at and all the work needed to get done that involves hauling tools and supplies.

I've been scouting around Craigslist looking at pick ups in the $2,500 range. (I don't care if it is pretty rough looking or high milage as long as it runs well)

I'm thinking that given the weight of some of the stuff I need to haul, gravel, concrete, pavers, etc. I should be on the lookout for a V8. Something like that would possibly also give me the opportunity to have a tow vehicle as well since I am working on a LeMons RX7 as well.

Is it better for me to get an older larger truck from the mid 80's or something sort of Mid Size from the 90s?

What sort of tow capacity should I look for?

Will an older truck from the 80's be easier and cheaper to maintain than something from the 90s? Is a 90s truck better because torque and brakes improved in that era and I might be able to get away with a smaller truck?

as I might be looking for something to tow a small sailboat (23 feet, 3500 pounds) I have an interest in this thread

I just picked up a 94 F350 crew cab dually for $3000. Runs like a top and will haul or tow anything I need.

One of the reasons I bought a dually.

Keep an eye on CL and deals pop up. Buy the best example you can find for the money.

I have a 1995 F150 4x4 Flareside with a factory tow package, 302 E4OD and 3:55's for sale just above Challenge price. New rear tank, 4 new shocks, new calipers/rotors/flex lines up front, new water pump, recent full tune up... Oh, it's a Supercab too.

If not mine, I'd look at similar trucks if I were you.

In your price range you should be looking primarily at maintenance. You need to find something that won't immediately require $1000 in ball joints and tie rod ends and shocks and brakes to make it a safe tow vehicle. It's astonishing how far people will let a pickup degrade.

Where are you located? 2500 should buy a decent mid90s full size pretty quick.

Join your local 4x4 forum. I the best truck deals on mine.

For those uses, go full size. Towing the RX would be fine with a mid size, but concrete, sand , and block quickly overload them. Same story if you ever want to drag a heavier car. Brakes and capacity are better on the later stuff, and judging by the maintenance on my 97 Explorer, an 80s model couldn't be any cheaper unless it paid you to fix it. Easier, depends on the project. 80s engineering seems to be easier to get to but fit and quality tolerances are worse.

Cxracer wrote: Is it better for me to get an older larger truck from the mid 80's or something sort of Mid Size from the 90s?

I'm not sure what you mean, are you saying the choice in your area/price range is either 1-ton truck from the '80's or 1/2-ton trucks from the '90's? I guess I'm not sure what you mean by "mid-size."

I would avoid an S-10, Ranger, Toyota/Nissan small pickup if you intend to do any real hauling. You just don't save enough money (either on the purchase or on gas) vs. a same year full-size to make up for the compromises, based on your projected usage. You seem to already know this with your V8 requirement.

If we're really talking heavy stuff then cast a wide net and get the best 1-ton Ford/Chevy/GMC you can afford. I am partial to anything with a 4L80.

ShadowSix wrote:

Cxracer wrote: Is it better for me to get an older larger truck from the mid 80's or something sort of Mid Size from the 90s?

I'm not sure what you mean, are you saying the choice in your area/price range is either 1-ton truck from the '80's or 1/2-ton trucks from the '90's? I guess I'm not sure what you mean by "mid-size." I would avoid an S-10, Ranger, Toyota/Nissan small pickup if you intend to do any real hauling. You just don't save enough money (either on the purchase or on gas) vs. a same year full-size to make up for the compromises, based on your projected usage. You seem to already know this with your V8 requirement. If we're really talking heavy stuff then cast a wide net and get the best 1-ton Ford/Chevy/GMC you can afford. I am partial to anything with a 4L80.

3/4 ton Burbans can be picked up for a surprisingly small amount of cash.

ShadowSix wrote:

Cxracer wrote: Is it better for me to get an older larger truck from the mid 80's or something sort of Mid Size from the 90s?

I'm not sure what you mean, are you saying the choice in your area/price range is either 1-ton truck from the '80's or 1/2-ton trucks from the '90's? I guess I'm not sure what you mean by "mid-size." I would avoid an S-10, Ranger, Toyota/Nissan small pickup if you intend to do any real hauling. You just don't save enough money (either on the purchase or on gas) vs. a same year full-size to make up for the compromises, based on your projected usage. You seem to already know this with your V8 requirement. If we're really talking heavy stuff then cast a wide net and get the best 1-ton Ford/Chevy/GMC you can afford. I am partial to anything with a 4L80.

As you can tell I'm not fully versed in pickup truck but it seems the more I delve into it the more I have been steering away from the smaller truck just because I'll probably break one to fast.

So 1-ton = 3500s? It sometimes looks from the spec sheets of mid to late 90s trucks that 1500s, 2500s and 3500s all have the same towing limits and sometimes the same engines.

I found a Chevy 3500 quad cab with a 5.7L 192K mikes 4L80 trans and a 410 rear end for my $2500 limit.

Do you think this would be overkill?

Yes, 1500/150 = 1/2 Ton
2500/250 = 3/4 Ton
3500/350 = 1 Ton

I don't exactly know how heavy your hauling needs are going to be (I have no idea what a paver weighs, for instance), I would think that the truck you mentioned is probably overkill, but if it's a good deal it's better to have too much truck than not enough! Off the top of my head the major disadvantages to getting a truck with more capacity than you need are: higher purchase price, worse ride, more expensive to register (this may just be an Ohio thing)... Big advantage is the 4L80, the sturdiest factory light truck trans I can think of.

Is it better for me to get an older larger truck from the mid 80's or something sort of Mid Size from the 90s?

I have a fair amount of experience towing heavy stuff with Dakotas. I dont particularly recommend it. At a minimum you'd want to have trailer brakes, and id look for a truck with ABS, too. The 96 i used for a long time would lock the fronts up WAAAAY too easy. My 3000lb Dynasty would haul stuff down from speed better simply because it had better brake balance.

One thing i will say about Dakotas and this may apply to other mid size pickups, is they are a lot closer to feeling 'sportive' than a full size even if they have similar acceleration.

Id still recommend a full size, by far. And i heartily agree with sentiments about the 4l80 trans. It's the go-to trans for towing with a cheap truck.

Vigo: I think he means mid-size more in terms of capacity than footprint.

Cxracer wrote: So 1-ton = 3500s? It sometimes looks from the spec sheets of mid to late 90s trucks that 1500s, 2500s and 3500s all have the same towing limits and sometimes the same engines.

Cxracer: I didn't address part of your question before. I don't know why the spec sheets would indicate the same tow rating for different capacity trucks, that really doesn't make sense, do you have a link to that info source?

The available engines and transmissions are a little schizophrenic. For GM stuff you will need to go for a 2500 or 3500 to get either diesel or a big block, you'll also need to get at least a 2500 to score a 4L80.

The 1/2, 3/4, 1 ton figure is only the rated rear axle cargo capacity(E36 M3 in the bed, not towing) I have seen many cases where towing capacity with the same drive line is the same over different models, but dualies and the ones with the big engine are normally rated much higher.

I am assuming you're talking about paver blocks, if so, just practice moderation with loading them.

Last year you could have bought my old truck (I sold it to a buddy who after 7 years sold it on when he got a 4X4) , 1974 F350 super cab, rebuilt engine had 35K on it. The truck was a lovely faded yellow, got a whopping 12 MPG IF you kept it below 70 MPH. Even towing you could manage 11 mpg. The tires were even in good shape. The going rate $1500, the AC even worked. The previous beast was a F100, which was fine with my small trailer and 1600lb car but for bigger stuff it was a little light hence the F350, the F350 went away because I got a deal on a E250 Class B (camper van) motorhome.

For $2500 should be able to get something that has good mechanicals but the looks are faded. I like the older trucks because they are stone axe simple and most people are frightened off by 30+ year old trucks..............my buddy picked up his 82 F350 4X4 for $1000 as it was on the tatty side.............it has a virtually new engine in it. The previous owner ditched it because of the 8 MPG, my buddy desert races bikes (hence the 4X4) and the truck only gets used a couple of times a month, 500-750 miles a year tops....gas milage is not an issue.

Get a 3/4 ton truck and keep your mind open, as long as it has solid mechanicals anything from 70-90 will do the job.

     Tom

Newer is better - brakes, ABS, engines

I'd try looking at a '97 up Ford F150 with the big V8. Drives and STOPS much better than the older trucks. Same with the newer model Chevy trucks from that era. The Fords had less tranny issues than the Chevy's iirc.

The tradeoff was the rather overblown modular issues(they beat dealing with death cool though)

I picked up my 1998 F150 for $750 just over 5 years ago. It had just over 200k on it and needed a couple of hundred in front end parts to pass safety. It's 2wd and it has the 4.6l engine. It's rated to tow 7000lbs and my horse trailer tips the scales at just over 6400lbs fully loaded. It gets used as a garbage hauler, horse hauler, car hauler and general farm truck. About three times a year I wish I had 4wd but I can live with that.

I'd try looking at a '97 up Ford F150 with the big V8.

Ick. I like the rest of the truck but id personally buy a chevy or dodge to avoid that motor. Kind of a shame, the rest of the truck including the trans is better than 97 anything else (but that ends in 98..).

Some people can deal with the utter mediocrity and annoyances of that motor, but i prefer not to own something i have such a low opinion of. I actually like the 97-04 4.2 trucks.

Well, God help me, I bought the truck. May end up being way more truck than I need but we will see. It sure is rough looking.

The guy had it registered as a commercial vehicle. He said DMV told him it had to be registered that way due to weight. But the CarFax report show that the guy who ones it before him had it registered as personal.

Anyone from CA know what effect the type of vehicle (commercial vs personal) effects reg costs?

The best tow vehicle by far is a big old duallie. You can tow stuff with a duallie that would give the driver of a 1/2-ton truck a major case of butt pucker.

And because they get horrendous gas mileage, decent old trucks aren't that hard to find cheap. But no, you can't have mine. It's not for sale!

There's a '96 Suburban turbo diesel, maybe 2500, sitting out for sale by a house I pass often. Over the past month I've watched the price on the windshield fall from $2500 to $1800. Lots of GM surface paint nastiness, but it looks fairly straight driving by. I have zero need of it right now, and I have zero money to buy it, but at $1800 it seems SO CHEAP.......

In reply to Cxracer:

Congrats! I think you'll be happy that you went for overkill rather than risking the alternative.

Sadly I have no idea what commercial vs. personal means, nor do I know if CA is California or Canada (or Cambodia?) so I can't help you out with that.

Also, photos! Let's see this beast of burden!

Cxracer wrote: Well, God help me, I bought the truck. May end up being way more truck than I need but we will see. It sure is rough looking. The guy had it registered as a commercial vehicle. He said DMV told him it had to be registered that way due to weight. But the CarFax report show that the guy who ones it before him had it registered as personal. Anyone from CA know what effect the type of vehicle (commercial vs personal) effects reg costs?

I'm not from CA, but here in VA, The PO had the truck registered as a "Truck" with a GVWR up around 15,000 lbs. The guy at DMV said I could register it with a lower GVWR and pay less if I wasn't going to be pulling 6-horse trailers around.

1988RedT2 wrote:

Cxracer wrote: Well, God help me, I bought the truck. May end up being way more truck than I need but we will see. It sure is rough looking. The guy had it registered as a commercial vehicle. He said DMV told him it had to be registered that way due to weight. But the CarFax report show that the guy who ones it before him had it registered as personal. Anyone from CA know what effect the type of vehicle (commercial vs personal) effects reg costs?

I'm not from CA, but here in VA, The PO had the truck registered as a "Truck" with a GVWR up around 15,000 lbs. The guy at DMV said I could register it with a lower GVWR and pay less if I wasn't going to be pulling 6-horse trailers around.

This is correct. DOT officers are cracking down big time on the people who are running "commercial" on regular truck and trailer plates, plus licensure. Basically, it is a cash grab for everyone's money. As long as you aren't a donkey and stay below 26k combined, you shouldn't have a problem.

ultraclyde said: There's a '96 Suburban turbo diesel, maybe 2500, sitting out for sale by a house I pass often. Over the past month I've watched the price on the windshield fall from $2500 to $1800. Lots of GM surface paint nastiness, but it looks fairly straight driving by. I have zero need of it right now, and I have zero money to buy it, but at $1800 it seems SO CHEAP.......

I wish I could shake my couch cushions for that... I would have been there yesterday.