In reply to Tyler H:
I think pretty much all OE vehicles use non-servicable u-joints these days.....simple thing is when the sealed ones go bad, buy greasable ones.
In reply to Tyler H:
I think pretty much all OE vehicles use non-servicable u-joints these days.....simple thing is when the sealed ones go bad, buy greasable ones.
yamaha wrote: In reply to Tyler H: I think pretty much all OE vehicles use non-servicable u-joints these days.....simple thing is when the sealed ones go bad, buy greasable ones.
Yeah, cars as well. E30s, Miatas, etc. That's hardly a deal breaker.
And it's not like I'll be towing for a living with it. Maybe 10 times a year max......a Miata on an open trailer and not going through the Rockies.
If my 22 year old C1500 can handle a Datsun Roadster on a U-Haul trailer your brand new F-150 shouldn't have any problem. I think the U-Haul trailer I towed with weighed more than the Datsun.
06HHR wrote: If my 22 year old C1500 can handle a Datsun Roadster on a U-Haul trailer your brand new F-150 shouldn't have any problem. I think the U-Haul trailer I towed with weighed more than the Datsun.
I rented one this weekend and asked them what it weighed - 2200 lb...... 600 lb. more than the car I put on it!
About "towing to the Rockies", that reminds me of a review of the F150 I read. In it, they complained about the poor mileage - as they towed a 10,000 lb. trailer from LA to Dever! Seriously, they didn't think to take into account what climbing thousands of feet has on mileage? When it comes to towing, it's all about hills!
Reading all these "my truck is better than your truck" comments reminds me of sitting at the table with my uncles during the holidays. Who is going to be the first to offer up a bumper pull contest? 
A contractor just came by and placed an order. I noticed that he drove the smaller Toyota truck. He's a pretty manly guy and I asked didn't he know that one measures the length of one's schlong by the truck one drives? His reply was that if you were worried about the length of your schlong, you had bigger problems that what you drove.
When I raced Motorcycles as a lad, people got their gear to the tracks by any means possible - old Rancheros, whatever. We've become a very gear-oriented society, and that usually equates to overkill.
I also like simple. My fleet of trucks and vans have experienced more problems with OHC Fords than SBCs. When Ford ran the 300ci 6s we never had a lick of trouble. I look at Ecoboost 6s and I think about all the turbo crap plus 4 cams, et cetera, and say berkeley that. Give me a pushrod V8. It'll get as good economy under many conditions, and whilst it may lack a bit in the torque department, that's a sacrifice I'm willing to take for less potential for trouble.
^The simplicity aspect does push me toward the 5.0.
I guess I'll also have to wait and go drive a Ram V6 diesel when it is released. Even though as Javelin points out, they may be much improved from prior years, the reputation still makes me iffy.
06HHR wrote: If my 22 year old C1500 can handle a Datsun Roadster on a U-Haul trailer your brand new F-150 shouldn't have any problem. I think the U-Haul trailer I towed with weighed more than the Datsun.
My 50 year old c1500 could handle the datsun and the trailer.......turned sideways across the flatbed. But alas, its from long before Chebby called their trucks that. 
z31maniac wrote: I guess I'll also have to wait and go drive a Ram V6 diesel when it is released. Even though as Javelin points out, they may be much improved from prior years, the reputation still makes me iffy.
Diesel = money when it breaks, and oddly enough I thought "New aged designs" were part of the arguement versus the ecoboost earlier in this thread.
z31maniac wrote: ^The simplicity aspect does push me toward the 5.0. I guess I'll also have to wait and go drive a Ram V6 diesel when it is released. Even though as Javelin points out, they may be much improved from prior years, the reputation still makes me iffy.
If you are leaning toward the 5.0 due to the turbos and direct injection gas motor, why would you even consider a diesel? They are more complex and more expensive than a gas direct injection engine. Turbos, 10x the fuel pressure, additional fluids for catalysts, much heavier engine, etc. There are good reasons why diesels cost so much, and it aint the block structure- that's just more metal.
That makes me curious.
alfadriver wrote:z31maniac wrote: ^The simplicity aspect does push me toward the 5.0. I guess I'll also have to wait and go drive a Ram V6 diesel when it is released. Even though as Javelin points out, they may be much improved from prior years, the reputation still makes me iffy.If you are leaning toward the 5.0 due to the turbos and direct injection gas motor, why would you even consider a diesel? They are more complex and more expensive than a gas direct injection engine. Turbos, 10x the fuel pressure, additional fluids for catalysts, much heavier engine, etc. There are good reasons why diesels cost so much, and it aint the block structure- that's just more metal. That makes me curious.
I'd have to quit being lazy to see if the increased mileage would offset the increased cost of the engine and mileage.
But, I suspect even over a 10 year period it probably doesn't pay for itself.
Not for your usage levels, no. Diesel wouldn't make sense.
In reply to z31maniac:
Okay, I get it. You have some preconceived notions about Dodge so you will blindly ignore what's clearly the best truck on the market right now. That's fine, I do understand that.
However, I'd take a new GM (14 model) over the F-150, in either V6TT or V8 form. The LS/LT engine architecture is so much more robust and reliable, plus cheaper to service to maintain, and as a bonus it has a better torque curve for towing. The fuel economy will be a wash. Keep in mind the 2014 F150 is still basically a 2004, the 2014 Chevy and GMC are both all new. I'd strongly suggest driving the GM twins if you are thinking new truck and insist on ignoring the Ram.
kreb wrote: A contractor just came by and placed an order. I noticed that he drove the smaller Toyota truck...
I drove a small V6 Toyota truck for 12 years, then upgraded to the Ecoboost F150. Same exact mileage.
For my usage, I calculated what I'd gain by going with a diesel and found that its premium price was never recovered. OTOH, tor those who tow everyday I'm sure it's a great choice.
Javelin wrote: In reply to z31maniac: Okay, I get it. You have some preconceived notions about Dodge so you will blindly ignore what's clearly the best truck on the market right now. That's fine, I do understand that. However, I'd take a new GM (14 model) over the F-150, in either V6TT or V8 form. The LS/LT engine architecture is so much more robust and reliable, plus cheaper to service to maintain, and as a bonus it has a better torque curve for towing. The fuel economy will be a wash. Keep in mind the 2014 F150 is still basically a 2004, the 2014 Chevy and GMC are both all new. I'd strongly suggest driving the GM twins if you are thinking new truck and insist on ignoring the Ram.
The interiors in the Chevy twins looks incredibly Chintzy. If I'm going to drop $40 large on something I'll be in everyday, I'm don't think I'd be happy looking at that interior.
Also, we get it, you think the Ram is God's gifts to the truck market.
It cracks me up in threads like this where you have to constantly post your same opinion over and over again just because people don't agree with it. As if posting it more times will suddenly convince them. 
Yeah, my experience with the older Toyota V6s is that their economy was no better than their domestic equivalents of almost 2x the displacement. I used to shake my head that my older, completely gutless 4-runner got worse mileage than my friends Suburban. The V6 in the current Tacoma OTOH is both powerful and easy on the gas.
I mentioned earlier that I trust the pushrod Chevy motors more than the OHC Fords. Not that all pushrod motors are the shiznitz. The 360 V8 on my Dakota recently had to have both heads replaced due to cracking. WTF! I'd think that an old design like that would be dialed in and run for a lot longer. My SBC Silverado is at 350k miles and still running strong with the motor never opened up.
In reply to z31maniac:
How have you seen the new GM interiors already? They've only been in dealers a few weeks. I'll agree the previous-generation wasn't that great.
I don't think the Ram is "God's gift", but it has pretty handily won nearly every comparison test since it came out and is clearly the most capable on paper. I don't know why you loathe Dodge so much, but it is blinding you to what is probably the best choice. That's not just my opinion, which is all I was pointing out to you. I really don't care what you buy, I don't own a stake in any of these companies.
How is suggesting the new GM twins "posting the same thing???
z31maniac wrote:alfadriver wrote:I'd have to quit being lazy to see if the increased mileage would offset the increased cost of the engine and mileage. But, I suspect even over a 10 year period it probably doesn't pay for itself.z31maniac wrote: ^The simplicity aspect does push me toward the 5.0. I guess I'll also have to wait and go drive a Ram V6 diesel when it is released. Even though as Javelin points out, they may be much improved from prior years, the reputation still makes me iffy.If you are leaning toward the 5.0 due to the turbos and direct injection gas motor, why would you even consider a diesel? They are more complex and more expensive than a gas direct injection engine. Turbos, 10x the fuel pressure, additional fluids for catalysts, much heavier engine, etc. There are good reasons why diesels cost so much, and it aint the block structure- that's just more metal. That makes me curious.
I should not have brought up cost, but I do find it curious that someone would avoid a gas direct injection turbo engine due to complexity, but will accept a more complex diesel. That is what I find curious.
In reply to Javelin:
There's the difference, Ford keeps updating their vehicles.....the current facelift has many different things and an exceptionally nice interior. I remember you ranting a year or so ago about how ford went stupid for the electric assist steering on the f150......I have yet to hear anyone else that doesn't plow snow complain.
In reply to yamaha:
Dodge has probably updated the Ram even more than Ford has done the F-150. And I ranted on the electric PS, but not on the F150, on the 991. Slightly different cars and reasons there...
alfadriver wrote:z31maniac wrote:I should not have brought up cost, but I do find it curious that someone would avoid a gas direct injection turbo engine due to complexity, but will accept a more complex diesel. That is what I find curious.alfadriver wrote:I'd have to quit being lazy to see if the increased mileage would offset the increased cost of the engine and mileage. But, I suspect even over a 10 year period it probably doesn't pay for itself.z31maniac wrote: ^The simplicity aspect does push me toward the 5.0. I guess I'll also have to wait and go drive a Ram V6 diesel when it is released. Even though as Javelin points out, they may be much improved from prior years, the reputation still makes me iffy.If you are leaning toward the 5.0 due to the turbos and direct injection gas motor, why would you even consider a diesel? They are more complex and more expensive than a gas direct injection engine. Turbos, 10x the fuel pressure, additional fluids for catalysts, much heavier engine, etc. There are good reasons why diesels cost so much, and it aint the block structure- that's just more metal. That makes me curious.
Complete brain fart on my part. There is no good reason.
can any of the people supporting the idea of a dodge tell me why used hemi engines are so expensive? i had to buy one for a dead (at 85k miles) Ram the other day, and was shocked what they bring. It's not like you're competing with people buying them up for hotrod projects either, not compared to GM engines anyway. Yet they cost 50% more than typical ford V8's, and twice what the Chevy stuff goes for.
Am i wrong to suppose there's demand?
In reply to z31maniac:
You are not the only one who has said that. So it's not so much a brain fart.
But it is interesting, isn't it?
alfadriver wrote: In reply to z31maniac: You are not the only one who has said that. So it's not so much a brain fart. But it is interesting, isn't it?
I guess maybe it's still thinking about the older diesels that aren't particularly complicated. Which, as you mentioned, is definitely not the case with the new ones.
In reply to z31maniac:
That, and they lasted a long time.
Whereas the same technology in cars wasn't as durable.
Although, I'm kind of inclinded to think that diesel truck owners really take care of the, considering the investment. Or they are more inclinded to ignore the fualts, considering the investment.
Enough of that wierd tangent- it's no help to you getting a new truck.
It's OK, I think this thread has just about run its course anyway.
Thanks for all the input gents, you too Javelin. 
I'll definitely go give the Ram a test drive when the 2014s come out. I've also read the 2015 F-150 is supposed to be doing some things to give a nice bump to their highway mileage as well.
You'll need to log in to post.
