Find one (1) flaw

Nothing unless you have to swerve to miss a hazard at 30 mph

4.7 is slow as shit.

>>16105956

rust magnets.

>>16105956
The V8 doesn't come in a manual which is a bummer but you get a column shifter which makes up for it

Otherwise it's a good truck, light for its size but kicks ass with the Access Cab/Long Bed

Looks shit

>>16105956
Some rust issues but otherwise bretty good

>>16106009
Moose test!

recalled for rusted frames

>>16106021
bullshit
that engine is glorious

File: 1464403812780.jpg (224KB, 1024x765px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 1024x765px

>>16105956

no diesel no torque. It's a fucking truck

>>16105956
Pickup beds are useless. There is no situation in which you would be better off with a pickup than with a flatbed or van.

>>16106751
Yeah, they are useless. Must be why pickup trucks have been the #1 selling vehicle in the country for decades.

>>16105956
it looks like a midsize truck

>>16105956
Inferior payload & towing compared to US competitors. There are no advantages that make it desirable over a GM, Ford, or Dodge.

>>16105956
You're in the car

>>16106785
And maybe 5% of those have ever had anything in the bed.

>>16106751
>flatbed
sure
>van
nah

pickups are good for shit that might not fit in a van or camper height wise. and most americans cant tie cargo down for shit, so id rather trust them with a pickup than a flatbed

>>16106843
now, let's not start pulling imaginary numbers out of our ass

>>16106848
Vans are good for things that might walk off or rust out if you leave them in the bed. Tradesmen that load their trucks up with tools would mostly be better off with vans or SUVs.

>>16106751
>using a van or flatbed to haul trash, firewood, mulch, gravel, etc.

A flatbed doesn't have sides to contain the materials
A van doesn't have a separation between cargo area and passenger area and it's much harder to get the cargo out

Nice try though

>>16106029
Huh?? How's that? Good friend of mine drives a 2001 and it has virtually no rust (no, not living inna desert)

File: IMG_20161103_000217.jpg (1MB, 4096x3072px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4096x3072px

>>16106867
Surely you wouldn't consider buying a flatbed without a removable fence? What's the point of that?

Pic related, I actually just picked up a cord of wood with my flatbed earlier today. Sorry I couldn't get a better picture, my flash doesn't work well unless you're right on top of your subject.

>>16105956
My brother had a 2001 model. Never took good care of it, other than to change the battery. Still for some reason held up decently. He probably might of had some problems I wasn't aware of

>>16106910
'99.5-00 tacomas were bough back by Toyota and destroyed. '01-'04 Tacoma owners were offered frame replacement. There were more corrosion issues after that as well.

"In November 2012, Toyota recalled 150,000 Tacomas from 2001–2004 for a rusted spare-tire carrier under the bed that could break and cause the tire to come loose. In 2008, Toyota’s infamous frame-rot fiasco on 1995–2004 Tacomas (about 800,000 trucks) was so bad the company had to buy many of them back, conduct extensive frame repairs, and/or extend frame-corrosion warranties by 15 years. The company never issued a recall for that problem.

About 690,000 Tacoma pickups, specifically 4×4 and PreRunner models from 2005–2011, have leaf springs installed above the rear axle rather than below it, and they can fail due to “stress or corrosion.” One of the leaves may separate and contact the fuel tank or brake line, possibly severing one or both with obvious consequences."

http://blog.caranddriver.com/690000-toyota-tacomas-recalled-for-leaf-springs-that-could-snap-damage-fuel-tank-and-brake-line/
https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/lawsuit-news/41522-toyota-tacomas-vulnerable-frame-rust-class-action-lawsuit-says/

But you know a guy that it didn't happen to, so the problem must not exist.

>>16106934
Nobody wants to drive an ugly piece of rusted shit like that on a daily basis. The point of a pickup truck is it can haul shit and makes a viable daily driver.

>>16106934
>pickup beds are useless, buy a flatbed
>you need to put sides on the flatbed so it works like a pickup bed for it to be useful

I don't even need to counter your argument, you're doing a great job of that yourself.

>>16106971
I think he means that you can transform the flat bed into a pickup bed when ever you want to, vice versa. But then again that pretty retarded nonetheless, I'd just rather a standard pickup bed honestly.

>>16106984
>you can transform the flat bed into a pickup bed when ever you want to
But why would he ever want to do that? According to him pickup beds are "useless", not sure why he'd want to convert his flatbed into something useless.

>>16106991
Ahh.. I see. Didn't read his comment to thoroughly.

>>16106971
>>16106991
>The fence is optional
>You can have multiple sizes of fence (I've got 4", 18", and 36" tall)
>The fence is thinner than a pickup bed so you waste less space
>The bed is fully over the wheels so you don't have wheel wells eating up space
>You can take the fence off, load something heavy, and then put the fence back on so you don't have to lift as high as you would with a pickup despite the higher bed
>If you damage the fence backing up or dropping something on it (face it, it happens from time to time), it's cheap or free to fix. Meanwhile, pickups that actually get used often have absolutely thrashed beds
>There's lots of room for saddle tanks under the flatbed
>It's easier to clean off after hauling shit like dirt or wet mulch that makes a mess
Name one thing a flatbed *doesn't* do better than a pickup.

>>16106961
>It's not as good at being a Civic
Okay, you got me there. Good thing I live in the land of the free where I'm allowed to own multiple vehicles.

>>16105956
Chink shit

>>16107046
So your solution to owning a "useless" pickup truck is to instead spend more money to buy two vehicles? That's brilliant. You're a really smart one. Buying a vehicle that combines the jobs of two different vehicles is a bad idea, because it's useless.

>>16107075
Compared to a Civic, your pickup has fewer seats, worse fuel economy, probably worse reliability, less comfortable unless it's a full size, no trunk to store things out of sight, it's probably slower, it requires more space to park, and for all those compromises it's not even any good at being a truck. You bought a piece of trash claiming it's because it's cheaper (I guess you're poor or something), while I almost certainly have less money into all three of my vehicles including purchase price, repairs, and modifications, than you do in your mall crawler.

>>16107114
>never driven a pickup before or experience owning one
holy fuck, you really can't be this retarded.

>>16107127
I literally posted a picture of my truck in this thread. Nice try, though.

File: IMG_20161103_082743342.jpg (2MB, 3120x4160px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3120x4160px

>>16105956
It ain't a Citroen Dolly

>>16105956
Rust

>>16106955
Dude, you are talking about Tacomas. OP's pic and the truck I >>16106910 referred to show Tundras

>>16105956
1. slow
2. handling is shit
3. slushbox
4. fuel consumption, especialy above 100mph

File: 20160805_202718_resized.jpg (660KB, 1594x897px) Image search: [Google]

660KB, 1594x897px

>>16105956
That small piece of the hood between the grille and the lights look weird when you're used to this

File: 14-foot-Dropside-Rental-VW-Crafter-03-620x410.jpg (84KB, 620x410px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 620x410px

>>16106867
>flat bed doesn't have sides
It has more sides than you do brains.

File: Star_kek.png (195KB, 475x268px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 475x268px

>>16107798
>europoor can't afford a real pickup
Rotflmao

>>16107862
>real pickup
>limiting yourself to an 8' styleside bed
Sure thing lol.
>pickup "enthusiasts" actually believe form>function
The irony

>>16107776
Well the hilux and tundra, aren't really related. The tundra is full size
So does the inside of your truck some like FREEDOM?

File: 14657718_663527790472240_1693761197_n.jpg (8KB, 251x251px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 251x251px

>>16107869
>too stupid to realize flatbed have more limitations than a pickup does
>muh functionality
>spoon feed me mommy

flatbed cucks btfo.

>>16107873
>too stupid to realize flatbed have more limitations than a pickup does
The only time a "flatbed have more limitations" than a styleside is if that flatbed was fitted to a GM pickup.

File: 1474503169171.jpg (36KB, 250x241px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 250x241px

>>16107880
>flatbed cucks literally this delusional
as expected.

>>16105956
Bed too short. I have to keep the tail gate down to haul 8 foot planks or a pair of dirt bikes (single bike can fit in diagnally).

File: 22434æå.jpg (148KB, 1107x722px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 1107x722px

>>16107870
Ofcourse it does

>>16107890
>I have to keep the tail gate down
I don't see the problem with that

File: 1474944744669.jpg (17KB, 268x284px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 268x284px

>flatbed cucks ragequit
as expected.

File: eg and spon.jpg (62KB, 604x453px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 604x453px

>>16107908

Spotted the GM fangirl

File: 1474246198151.jpg (384KB, 1437x1296px) Image search: [Google]

384KB, 1437x1296px

>>16107912
>implying
stay mad flatbed cuck

File: wtf-silverado-1.jpg (82KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 640x480px

>>16107916
>stay mad
You'd know what that's like kek

>>16107919
gm btfo, how will they ever recover

File: gm pikup.jpg (72KB, 504x404px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 504x404px

>>16107922
They won't.
They'll just keep crashing in frustration of not having a superior accessible

File: 6809839e_newpics013.jpg (1MB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x1536px

>>16105956

File: gm pikup1.jpg (91KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 640x480px

>>16107926
>superior accesible...
bed lol

File: 2016-ford-f-150-lariat-appearance-package-05.jpg (334KB, 1600x1067px) Image search: [Google]

334KB, 1600x1067px

>>16107926
>superior accessible
youre right, they weren't a ford pickup

>>16106843
I would say maybe 15% of pickups have never been used as pickups.

File: F350_Welded_Tray_-_Angle_View_2.jpg (170KB, 1000x746px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 1000x746px

>>16107934
The only way that bed could possibly be more accessible that a dropside flatbed is if it was cut open with a can opener... which isn't far fetched I guess lol

>>16105956
shit mpg
ugly interior

>>16105956
Lower ball joints.

Timing belt.

About 15mpg HWY.

Handling is shit on every low end pick up ever made so that should just be expected.

Other than that, great truck. Reliable, 4.7 is a great engine, and it's not fuck huge like every other new truck.

>>16107873
Ah yes, flatbeds have more limitations. I guess that's why commercial trucks all use styleside trailers ... oh wait, nevermind. Styleside is complete trash.

>>16106497
It's slow and gets bad mpg.

>>16107255
Is that a tundra? Fuck, it looks so tiny though.

>>16108021
>>16106021
Just as fast the other full size trucks of the time.

>>16108176
That gen of tundra was kinda inbetween a fullsize and a midsize truck


They still had the issues with the spare tire rusting out

File: 1474949976533.jpg (111KB, 680x962px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 680x962px

>>16108002
>please believe my lies!
Flatbed cucks literally this desperate
stay btfo

>>16108280
>Still not a single argument for why a pickup bed is more useful than a flatbed
It's because there are none and you know it.

File: 4981657865481.png (444KB, 762x437px) Image search: [Google]

444KB, 762x437px

>>16106867
>A flatbed doesn't have sides to contain the materials

Many do. They call them stakesides. They are removable as necessary. They're cool because you can load things from the side pretty easily if you wanted.

>>16105956
Nips first attempt at impressing murrika with a fullsize and they surprisingly got it right, though I categorize it somewhere between a full size and a compact,

>>16106751
You've obviously never needed to haul gravel or get loaded by an excavator

>>16105956
Don't know about a flaw, but someone appears to have put a bed on an econobox. As long as they don't pretend it's an actual truck, I don't see a problem

File: IMG_20161103_125134.jpg (2MB, 4096x3072px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4096x3072px

>>16109355
I have, actually. It worked fine. Today I've got another half cord or so of oak, plus scraps.

>>16106751
flatbed is higher than a regular bed making loading dirt bikes a fucking pain in the ass. cant dump a yard of shit in the back of your van with a front loader as well. theres a reason the pickup is so popular, its fucking useful.

>>16108577
You don't look like a cuck, stay poor

>>16109589
I see jacked up pickups with beds higher than mine carrying motorcycles all the time so it must not be too difficult. I imagine it's just a matter of getting longer ramps or backing up to a retaining wall.

>>16109655
This. The 150mm difference in height is arbitrary when the whole bed is accessible from either side.
>side loading a pair of quads instead of being stuck with just one
>>16109589
The styleside bed is only the most popular option in the continent that favours form over function.

File: 95812151990617.jpg (912KB, 1024x682px) Image search: [Google]

912KB, 1024x682px

>>16107776
Then the t100 wold be more to your likening,
>>16106021
Your right, 3.4 is a much better engine.

File: IMGP24798.jpg (846KB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

846KB, 2048x1152px

>>16106751
?

I fit an entire 93 Buick Century in mine.

File: 1474502725005.png (165KB, 327x316px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 327x316px

>>16110865
>muh function
stay btfo flatbed cuck

>>16108577
Because, it's useful for one. gets the job done whenever I need to deliver shit, whether it be gravel, dirt, heavy scrap, lumber etc... whatever it may be, it can handle it. all in all, I have no need for a flatbed/pickup conversion.. If I can get the job done in just an ordinary pickup, then I'm satisfied, and so far.. I got noting but satisfaction from mine.

>>16106751
vans are pretty damn useful, but almost all of them lack any kind of decent offroad capability. i'd much rather have the extra ground clearance and 4x4 for driving on wet farm roads or on the dalton highway

>>16112748
Not that guy, but your argument is literally "I don't know any better and ignorance wins".
>>16112697
>mah form
>not interested in function when talking pick ups
Spotted the GM fangirl

>>16106751
genuine bus riding cunt over here. I'm a farmer, do you know how fucked I'd be without having a tray on the back of my ute? I use it on the daily. oh and its mated to 4wd. good luck doing what I do with my ute with a flatbed or a van, you'd be stuck in 30 minutes. you clearly have no idea what you're talking about and probably don't even have a license. fuck off

>>16105956
I have to take the whole thing apart to replace the alternator.

>>16112904
> I'm a farmer, do you know how fucked I'd be without having a tray on the back of my ute?
Not that guy, but being a Kiwi farmer I would've thought you'd have half a brain to understand the ergonomic benefits of having a dropside flat bed over a styleside pick up bed.

File: 12.jpg (3MB, 2690x4781px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2690x4781px

>>16112912
not that guy, but I'm referring to a flat deck dropside and not a wellside 'bed'. benefits of both worlds. it's not a dedicated flatbed truck, still has sides which are removable. see photo in question which is my ute with the sides and rear of the deck removed. best of both worlds and lets face it I can go many more places with this than a dedicated flatbed truck (assuming we've got the same thing in mind when flatbed is mentioned) or a van. ideal scenario would be a single cab ute for the longer tray but this is what I've got to work with

>>16112920
That's what everyone here is referring to as a flatbed. Compare it to a standard styleside pickup bed like in the OP. That's what's being called useless.

>>16112936
My misunderstanding I apologise. I still believe for general non-commercial use a styleside does the job just fine for the average person. I mean if you're only taking a couple buckets of dirt from the landscapers and a couple bikes on the back a year then that's all you really need. Far easier than a van still in my opinion because you can overhead load. I'd never have a styleside myself because of what I do.

It really all comes down to your use of the thing and what you want out of it. But I believe comparing a van to a ute no matter the tray type is like apples to oranges. 2 completely different puppies in my opinion

>>16112894
Let me put it this way, my point is that i'm completely better off with a ordinary pickup bed rather than a stupid flatbed. Like I said it can do the work I need it to do, so in the end I'm satisfied with just that. Both have their uses sure, but I prefer a pickup over a flatbed. end of story.

>>16112968
This guy here is a great example of what I was saying here >>16112950

It all comes down to preference and your own needs. But you can't compare a ute to a van no matter what bed you've got attached.

>>16112950
Taking 1-2 dirtbikes on short trips on a regular basis is the only real use case that makes sense for a pickup bed, as far as I can tell. Any more than that and you'll need a trailer or a large flatbed, any farther than that and you'll want trailer behind a van or SUV for your gear, and any less often than that and you'll want a trailer and a tow vehicle that's more practical for whatever you actually do on a day to day basis.

Since the lower tailgate makes RO/RO the only thing a pickup bed is actually better at than a dropside, and most pickup beds aren't big enough to roll anything on other than two dirtbikes or one ATV, it's a pretty narrow use case.

And I feel the need to point out that lifted pickups compromise their single advantage compared to flatbeds and are therefore literally less useful than slammed trucks.

>>16112996
I can fit 3 dirt bikes on the flat deck of that ranger with the sides still on (no rear gate). It's a tight fit but its doable. 2 on the outside facing forwards and the center one backwards. I've got eyelets for tiedowns built into the floor of my tray however.

But yeah it comes down to application. If you're going to be moving a lot of bikes on the regular then yeah you'll want a trailer. I mean, a standard pickup bed with a canopy on it makes for a great tow vehicle with 4x4 capabilities and plenty of gear space.

Well yeah it depends. I mean there's lifted enough to fit a set of 33's under your guards lifted. But then there's American small dick lifted which is absolutely ridiculous in my opinion.

>>16112912
"Styleside" is about lowering the deck height without reducing suspension travel. In a sense, it's something in between a flatbed/tray and a van.

Admittedly, American trucks tend to be overkill when it comes to ground clearance and suspension travel, but that's customer demand for you.

Obviously it's less convenient not being able to open or remove the bed sides, and having wheel wells inside the bed is less ideal for loads like drywall or plywood. The tradeoff is that the lower bed floor is easier to load from ground level, and offers a lower center of gravity when the bed is loaded.

Personally, I've always liked my dad's VW type 2 crew cab, with 3 bed sides that flip down. The proportions of that truck probably wouldn't work on a modern pickup, though, unless it were designed solely for urban use.

>>16113007
A standard pickup bed with a canopy is just an SUV without the option of third row seating.

>>16113015
But you have the option of removing the canopy and having a bed

>>16113020
Yeah, but the bed isn't actually useful for anything. If you're concerned about messy loads, bedliner the back of the SUV and rinse it out before the seats go back in. Or, you know, get a flatbed.

>>16113013
You have to lift over the sides of a styleside, though. It's easier to lift something onto a flatbed even if you're loading from the rear because you don't have to lift one end onto the tailgate and then reposition. You just slide straight over without worrying about the sides of the bed until the object is far enough on the bed to balance.

Wow, talk about a derailment from finding a flaw about a jap crap truck to some retard argument about shitty trucks vs shitty flat-beds or whatever.

Well, anyway. The old Tundra is what you'd expect from something from the pickup era of the early 2000s, horrible on gas for one like any other truck EVEN with the v6 option, slow (but who cares about speed in a work vehicle eh). cheap plastic interior, bleh everything. I'll give it this, it is a pretty reliable truck, my experience anyway, dunno what your gonna encounter if you plan on buying it.

>>16113032
>Yeah, but the bed isn't actually useful for anything.
>IT'S NOT PERFECTLY SUITED TO THIS EXACT THING SO IT MUST BE UTTERLY USELESS
Not every load is plywood or drywall and most of the time loading/unloading from the back of a truck isn't a problem.

Nobody loads stuff over the side of a bed unless it's something light enough to just toss in.

Tailgates typically open flush with the bed floor and can support a lot of weight, so loading from the back is the same procedure as the edge of a flatbed, aside from a little extra sliding distance.

As far as loose/messy loads go, vans and SUVs generally don't provide full separation of the cargo and passenger area. It's easy to protect the load surface in the back, but something like dirt or manure is going to mess/stink up the entire inside of a van. An open bed also makes it easier to load with heavy equipment and unload with a shovel (being able to stand in the bed).

Caps are removable, as mentioned, and are lighter than SUV bodies due to not needing structural strength to protect passengers. A smaller passenger compartment volume is also easier to keep warm/cool.

>>16113134
>Not every load is plywood or drywall and most of the time loading/unloading from the back of a truck isn't a problem
It's still a damn sight more ergonomic side loading sheet like building materials, not to mention a lot less likely to damage said sheet. A simple alternative however are roof racks, and then you're not limited to 8' lengths of building materials and I find it surprisingly easier to load sheet above above my head as opposed to waist height in a bed (drywaller here).
>Nobody loads stuff over the side of a bed unless it's something light enough to just toss in.
>Tailgates typically open flush with the bed floor and can support a lot of weight, so loading from the back is the same procedure as the edge of a flatbed, aside from a little extra sliding distance.
If it's too heavy to be cast over the side of the bed, then you either end up with a crap load distribution, or you have to jump up into the bed to then move the load forward.

Totally agree with the bed cap thing though. Even with a bed cap, a similar wheelbase crewcab/shortbox pickup will still have substantially more cargo area than an SUV equivalent. You just have to sacrifice third row seating which is well worth it in my opinion.
My perfect outfit would be a 1/4 crew cab shortbox and cap with full length roof racks.

Are people (useless faggots) still trying to argue that vans are better? I'll believe them when I see even one fucking construction site with more than a single chevy van among thirty loaded down pickups.
>Muh roof
What is a fucking tarp

>>16113653
that and some retarded flatbed atrocity.

>>16113678
>form over function
Spotted the mall crawler

>>16113720
>literally this retarded and implying
well you can say whatever, still see more pickups used mostly for work than a shitty memebed truck

>muh function
don't even know what the hell function has to do with anything

>>16113749
Literally "I don't know any better and my ignorance is greater than your reason".
>memebed
That'd be a styleside bed. For logical reason throughout the thread.

>>16106984
But you have a tailgate for that. If you're transporting things so large they won't fit in a bed you need to use a trailer anyways.

>>16115322
Or you could have a bed that's relevant and lessen the likelihood of needing to tow a trailer.
As an added bonus, if you are towing a trailer a flat bed still has the ability to be sideloaded with a forklift, and has the ability to carry two iso sized pallets accessible with such forklift.

But hey, at least the styleside looks pretty right?

>>16115363
Well I guess I'll need to use my other truck when I'm unloading my warehouse with my forklift.

>>16115374
I didn't realise the warehouse and forklift in question has to be registered to the owner of whatever pick-up is being loaded on location... great job.

>>16115388
I didn't realize I needed to transport two iso pallets of things at a time so often and that I need to load them sideloaded with a forklift. I realize now how much I need a flatbed truck.

>>16115390
>implying that's the only advantage
Do you have the memory of a goldfish?

>>16115573
Who knows, I own a mid-sized truck with a canopy that gets double the gas mileage of your vehicle and it fits my needs. Honestly, most people don't need vehicles as large as flatbeds and most pickups don't need the load as well secured so it is preferable for every day use.

>>16115580
Are you implying a midsize doesn't benefit from an 8x6 flatbed? Are you implying your midsize pickup gets twice the mileage of my midsize pick up? Please, tell me more.

File: _20161022_002249.jpg (73KB, 663x1063px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 663x1063px

>>16116562
I'm a cuck that never did maintenance to me truck. Never speak to this to me of my wife's son ever again. Tryon will find you, and cuck you.

depending on the year and location

lower ball joints
rust
timing belt on a interference engine
starter underneath the intake manifold..!?

minor things if you maintain it though, I love my 06

>>16105956
>corrosion
On the frame, leaf springs, basically all of the undercarriage.

>tfw coming back to this thread two days later to read through the carnage I caused
Feels good, man.

Also, pickup beds are still the worst of all worlds between flatbeds, vans, and SUVs.

>>16118317
This. The only argument for a pickup bed so far has been "well it's fine for me and I don't know any better".
I guess ignorance is a staple trait of a typical pickup owner.

>>16118347
Well if it IS fine for that particular person, why does it even matter in the end? If they are happy about the benefits their pickups can offer then let that be that. But no you have to shove this whole flatbed thing in our faces like the pretentious cunt you sound like.

>>16118456
> like the pretentious cunt you sound like
Rofl, do you know what "pretentious" means? Or are you just using big in an effort to come across more intelligent than you actually are?
Styleside pickup beds (and therefore their owners) are closer in definition to being pretentious.

File: number-of-internet-arguments-ive-won.png (15KB, 528x434px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 528x434px

>>16118464
Nah, It's just the way I talk, but If you need me to use resort to using kiddy words so you can comprehend them a little bit better then i'll do just that. Also way to completely ignore my question.

>>16118503
> If you need me to use resort to using kiddy words so you can comprehend them a little bit better then i'll do just that
I've got no trouble comprehending them, as I stated (since you clearly have lack the comprehension of the posts you're replying to) you're lacking the comprehension of the words you're using. I think it's in your interest to resort back to the kiddie words.
>Also way to completely ignore my question
It's been already been answered goldfish man.
>why does it even matter?
Just pointing out the ignorance portrayed by such defenders of pickup beds. You seem to think it matters enough to engage in an argument you don't even have an argument for.
>but it's fine if you don't know any better

>>16118526
His grammar is a little off, but he's fine

Who needs grammer anyways proper langugas an spook

>>16118526
Well I guess it just comes down to preference whether it be said style bed or flatbed and do the job the owner needs needs and wants its it to do. Both have their pros and cons so at this point I guess it's agree to disagree.

>>16105956
Its not a ram powerwagon

>>16106751
I can't imagine hauling gravel or sand in a flatbed truck.

>>16106867
Didn't see you had already mentioned the gravel lel

Holy shit a lot of autism in this thread
>muh styleside
>muh flatbed

jesus christ never change /o/

>>16118776
You're an idiot. It's also been mentioned >>16107950
>>16109026
>>16109566
the majority of flatbeds have dropsides for that very reason.
>>16118575
>Well I guess it just comes down to preference whether it be said style bed or flatbed and do the job the owner needs needs and wants its it to do.
If the job involves practicality, then flatbed. If the job involves looking good for photos, styleside.
>Both have their pros and cons so at this point I guess it's agree to disagree.
I agree with this statement as I explained.