Does Ford make the best trucks?

>>17781717
No, Chevy does.

File: rip corvette.jpg (129KB, 823x903px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 823x903px

>>17781717
pic very related

File: IMG_0483.jpg (93KB, 635x635px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 635x635px

No.

File: 2017-Honda-Ridgeline-PLACEMENT-626x382.jpg (65KB, 626x382px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 626x382px

it makes the prettiest ones currently, yes

but not the most utilitarian ones.

most people who buy an f150 would be better off with a ridgeline

>>17781717
in the market for my first pickup. Test drove a RAM1500 and a couple different F150s. Leaning towards the RAM. Id like a Sierra or Silverado but they're a little more expensive in these parts (Ontario)

Yes
But so does Dodge, as its the only thing they do right
Chevy is garbage

>>17782281
Ram has best ride with air ride system, I almost got dodge over f150 but I wasn't too sure of reliability of dodge. I have friend who has s500 with air ride system and he is going thru hell right now trying to fix it.
F150 has best engine in my opinion, 2.7 with 3.7 rear ended will beat 5.7 from Toyota. And more power is just tune away.
I would rank:
Dodge: best ride
Chevy: love the look of front grill
Ford : ecobeast
Toyota: lol no thanks

>>17781717
>implying a truck exists that isn't shit

>>17781772
pretty and truck just dont belong together. A truck should look like it was built for doing work, not something a soccer mom would want to drive.

>>17782335
thanks

probably wouldnt be looking at ones with air susp anyway, but I have heard great things about it. Too scared to spend more than 30-35k on a new vehicle these days with the state of the ontario economy.

File: 5L-diesel-engine-nissan-titan.jpg (149KB, 778x342px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 778x342px

In terms of half tons? Nissan Titan XD.
Although I'm really impressed with the VM Motori manufactured 3.0 Ecodiesel in the Ram, seems to be achieving some impressive things not only in pickups but also WK2 Jeeps. Was a notable rate of failure early on with this engine's Ram application, but that was put down to an assembly fault.
Awaiting on Ford's inbound diesel option that looks likely to be the Ford/PSA developed 3.0 V6 that's been doing the rounds in Landrover for some time.
It still surprises me Toyota N.A hasn't applied the 1VD-FTV from the global Landcruiser to the Tundra.

>>17782347
But apparently best truck is by acceleration and power increasability >>17782335

>>17782574
The XD isn't really a half ton, nor is it really a 3/4 ton. I like what Nissan did, but the tow ratings just aren't there. The diesel's MPG is also lower than the 6.7 Powerstroke and Cummins, which just doesn't make sense.

File: internally.jpg (16KB, 260x260px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 260x260px

>>17781717
Yes, but they also make stupid choices. I am extremely annoyed with Ford with their choice to discontinue the 6.2L in the F150 lineup. Why would I buy a new truck and downgrade engines from a 3/4 ton and 1 ton engine to a half ton engine? Ford should at LEAST have the 6.2 as an expensive option. The ecoboost is not as reliable or bulletproof as the 6.2, as shown by Ford's choice to keep the big iron block in the Super Duty lineup.

>>17782614
Forgot to say my truck has the 6.2L. It's also a Platinum, so again, why upgrade trucks?

>>17782601
What makes you think it's not a half ton? Price wise it comes in with a small premium over the Ecodiesel Dodge,and offers a hell of a lot for the money.

>>17782689
Then what is the normal Titan?

>>17782749
A more budget concious lighter duty half ton.

>>17782590
You sound like someone who is happy with Miata and Frs speed

FIX
OT
RGAIN
DONY

>>17781730
It would be if they didn't have garbage transmission and would actually diagnose their "Chevy Shake" problem.

>>17782335
Is the first gen Ecoboost really that good?

>>17782847
That'd make sense if my idea of sports car was a good duty cycle and longevity.
Try to keep your analogy on point princess.

File: IMG_0975.jpg (4MB, 4032x3024px)

4MB, 4032x3024px

>>17782315
>the only thing they do right

>>17781772
>Ridgeline
>Utility

Unibody front wheel drive lel my explorer is more of a truck.

>>17783078
Woah no need to take it peronal.
I always mod my cars, don't matter truck or sports car. To me having option of easy tune is great.

>>17783064
every sibgle family member I have only buys Toyota. I had few tacomas for work truck before. Without driving any other trucks I thought this is best as work truck can get.
One time my coworker let me drive his at the time new 3.5 ecoboost fx4 trim.
Holy shit I was blown away by how comfortable and fast the truck was.
Go test drive one. I wasn't impressed by tundra but f150 felt better in every way

>>17782574
>look at me using specifics nobody cares about in an attempt to impress people I'll never meet

>>17782617
because your truck is already 5 years old? because the Ecoboost is better than the 6.2L in every way?

and you know the SD 6.2L isn't the same as the F150 6.2L right? It's a dumbed down one with less power and torque and lower compression basically just made to be a cheap shit work engine that will last a long time. you really think a SOHC engine with 2 valves per cylinder deserves to be the "expensive" option?

>>17783295
I think that was the whole point of that post.

>>17783390
>Woah no need to take it peronal
Presuming you mean "personal", and that reply was anything but... You seem intent on making it personal though.

File: 1503335873787.gif (141KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 250x250px

>>17783078

>>17781772
This is a true statement. Most F150s are grocery getters, so why not get something made to get groceries?

File: popthehood.jpg (55KB, 750x747px)

55KB, 750x747px

>>17783552
>In every way

The 2017 Ecoboost makes 375 horsepower, and my 6.2 makes 411. Sure the Ecoboost has more torque, but I'd rather keep my extra 40 horsepower. The 6.2 will get similar MPG towing, go on Youtube and looking up towing tests of the Ecoboost and the 6.2 in a SD and you'll see the Ecoboost's MPG isn't all that great towing. Around town though yea the Ecoboost does have good MPG, but I didn't buy a truck for MPG. Also something about towing that some people don't talk about is engine breaking. The 6.2 naturally has around DOUBLE the engine breaking the 3.5 does. It handles loads significantly better.

Parts for the 6.2 are cheap as hell, and not that it would break in the first place since its a cast iron block high displacement motor. It's completely bulletproof. Compare the search results for "Ecoboost problems" and "Ford 6.2 problems". Significantly less on the 6.2L.

So again, why upgrade trucks?

>>17784029
I spelled braking wrong. Guess its the autism from talking about the ecoboost.

File: 05-silverado-hero.jpg (21KB, 400x209px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 400x209px

This is the best truck ever built. In close second are the 70s-98s Chevy, Ford, and dodge trucks. Everything sold today is bullshit

File: ck.jpg (232KB, 2560x1472px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 2560x1472px

>>17784042
You posted the wrong truck there bud

>>17784064
I love those (Had one) but my 05 is literally a more OP GMT400

>>17783552
>you really think a SOHC engine with 2 valves per cylinder deserves to be the "expensive" option?
Don't worry, during ownership it'll prove not to be the most expensive option. Sounds like you'd be better off with a Nissan GTR.

File: IMG_0945.jpg (2MB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2048x1536px

>>17782347
>The yank thinks he knows what work vehicles look like
lol

>>17782347
All the whores in LA driving G-wagens prove you otherwise.

File: IMG_2609.jpg (48KB, 500x315px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 500x315px

>>17784042
>cat eye
Fucking gross. 00-02' is best looking
Also creaky interior

File: 4546258584_7b2befb99d.jpg (106KB, 500x343px)

106KB, 500x343px

>>17784253
Whats wrong with cateye?
>have a 2003 Suburban Z71

00-02 had shit dash dials and steering wheel and they had the same dash design until 06 m8. Shit is squeaky either way kek

File: 2017_Ram_3500.jpg.image.500.jpg (24KB, 500x358px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 500x358px

>>17781717

GUTS
GLORY
RAM

>>17784295
03-06 Chevy truck front ends a ugly as sin. Even the fords of them look better which is embarrassing

>>17784308
Nah senpai. They were the best especially with the bulge hood.

>>17783535
or maybe

just maybe

he actually researches and knows about cars, and isn't a busriding faggot

>>17784325
>/o/
>not busriding faggots
Oh god my sides

T A C O M A
A
C
O
M
A

>>17784368
F R A M E R O T
R
A
M
E
R
O
T

File: 6a00e552a02fb48833016764314d5d970b.jpg (10KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 320x240px

>>17784431
Literally not an issue if you live in a state that actually matters

>>17784458
>live in south
>have 4runner
>never drive on salted roads
>always keep underneath clean
>it's still rusting

>>17784368
Tacomas are expensive as full size truck with mpg of full size. I personally think they are boring, gut less v6 or even worse 4banger

>>17784491
My 5.0 f150 gets 2 combined mpg better than the Tacoma, weighs the same and has 100 more hp/torque

>>17781772
I don't want a Odyssey pickup. Thanks.

>>17783090
Oh yeah the hellcat also

>>17784029
what are you towing with a half ton? weight?

>>17784305
TONY!

File: zQGd4qa.png (587KB, 1116x538px) Image search: [Google]

587KB, 1116x538px

>>17783090
>>17784623
Yeah, pure Dodge ingenuity. They really do things "right"

File: allahu ackbar.jpg (131KB, 999x541px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 999x541px

no, toyota does

File: i fix it good.jpg (46KB, 582x390px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 582x390px

>>17781772
>it makes the prettiest ones currently

>>17784638
11k, not often enough to justify a SD though.

>>17782574
why is the frontier such a fucking piece of shit, nissan hardly even advertises it anymore

>>17784735
Beats me, but I wouldn't waste my time with it. They really are buckets of shit.
In terms of midsize pickups I'd go for the "Duramax" Colorado. Said Duramax also being a Fiat/VM Motori powerplant... Either that or the solid but uninspiring Tacoma.

File: IMG_9115.jpg (46KB, 400x460px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 400x460px

>>17782335
>ecobeast

>>17783055

Don't their Duramax's still come with allison's?

My 05 Duramax's Allison is fucking bulletproof.

>>17784641
Yeah. Because [insert ultra expensive super at manufacturer here] has never had an issue like that. Wasn't that like one or two cars as well, traced back to a supplier defect?

>>17785051
Not talking about their 2500s and up, just their 1500 half tons.

>>17782315
I'd look into a warranty if going with the RAM. There is a reason they are at the bottom of the reliability charts. My dad has a lifetime bumper to bumper warranty on his 2013.

>>17784478
Get the undercarriage sprayed with oil.