European pickup trucks

[supton]

I think you had a bad egg too. Mine hasn't been the paradigm of reliability but it has done just about as expected: 100k of trouble free, and then about $1k in repairs per year after that. Albeit from driving 25-30k/year.

I still like my Jetta, but having Toyota's around now means a whole new level of isolation: it's not that they are dead quiet and completely disconnected from the road, but they are vastly different. I'm in a bit of a rut in life, where I just need to keep showing up for the next few years: no real time to tear into an automobile to keep it going, need to be at work or be with the kids. Is what it is, the consequence of various choices. Had I known six months ago that I'd get rid of the Jetta I wouldn't have gotten the truck; but my wife is doing her best to convince me to keep the truck, so I suspect it stays.

I manage to get 20mpg in it if I really try; I don't think any CUV that can move my next popup trailer is going to do better than about 28mpg in similar conditions. Everything's a tradeoff.

Supercharged Regal, now that would be different. No, at the moment I want to take a break from fast cars. I've had a nasty tendancy to drive fast lately, and I want to nip that habit before it gets expensive. I don't know what I'm compensating for, but I'm just as content driving my truck at 60mph as I've been driving my Jetta at 80. I cannot explain it; it's very weird.

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: Number21
Originally Posted By: Spazdog

I sincerely doubt a 1 ton would be more comfortable than a half ton. Just from the spring rates of the rear axle.

I like trucks too. But I just couldn't justify having to hypermile to try to squeak out 20mpg. Or not being able to park it in my garage without disassembling my work bench.

You're still judging people without knowing how they use it. First of all you can't buy a half ton diesel, except maybe for the 2014 model year. I park mine in my shop, which is 8600 square feet. I could park an 18 wheeler in there. And my truck gets better mileage than my Mom's 2001 BMW car with a V8. Her car gets better mileage than the ones with V12s.

I don't "have" to hipermile. I can afford as much diesel as I want. All of the judgements being made here about trucks can be said about any car other than a deathtrap economy car. For that matter you are being ridiculous even if you drive a Geo Metro, you could be riding a bike. How dare you.


I think we are actually agreeing. I don't begrudge anyone for their choice. The choice wasn't right for me personally. I do reserve the right to make fun of anyone who gets said truck to use as a passenger car just as he may choose to make fun of me for driving a passenger car and using it like an SUV.

 

[supton]

I kinda look at it like this: This is a forum. On one hand, we can type things we'd never say in person. The anonymity means we can say things without repercussion; we can point out flaws that we'd feel uncomfortable about stating in person. It's a bit easier giving the plain raw truth.

OTOH we can be awefully mean spirited while doing just that.

 

[ls1mike]

Originally Posted By: supton
Supercharged Regal, now that would be different. No, at the moment I want to take a break from fast cars. I've had a nasty tendancy to drive fast lately, and I want to nip that habit before it gets expensive. I don't know what I'm compensating for, but I'm just as content driving my truck at 60mph as I've been driving my Jetta at 80. I cannot explain it; it's very weird.


I don't think my truck ever sees over 60 mph because it is usually towing or has something in the bed.
The last time the Trans Am saw over 70 was at the track. Now red line that is a different story.

 

[gman2304]

They're are tradeoffs in every decision we make in life. I would like to be able to say that my vehicles get 40 mpg, like some on this forum and some people I know in my real life. But I also have imagined myself sitting at a stop light and the light turns green and I get half way through the intersection and look to my left and realize that the guy in the F350 dually pulling a 4 horse trailer is texting his buddy about being late for the horse show and is bearing down on me and my 40 mpg Honda Civic and I'm about to be T-boned into oblivion! I try to imagine the last thing I see in this life is a blue oval at about eye level and possibly realizing... if time allows, that I'm about to die! Sadly I'm sure this scenario plays out many times a day in this country. I've consciously had this thought when considering purchasing new vehicles over the last 15 years. I've bought full size cars since 1998 for this reason, realizing the laws of physics might kick in and help in this scenario. Of course anything can happen but I prefer to take my chances with a big car over MPG's any day of the week. Thanks

 

[supton]

I dunno, rates for rollovers are substationally higher for tall vehicles. I don't feel safer in my truck. Crumple zones and air bags, yes; simple mass, no. While it's true that having more mass means you are likely to do better, all other things the same, you still have to contend with something that handles worse and is more apt to tip over (yes, I know, VSC attempts to reduce rollover risk--but why not have a lower Cg vehicle if you're worried?). All things considered I think it's a zero-sum gain, trading the ability to steer around a situation for the ability to plow through it.

The only true gain, IMHO, in a T-bone accident is that the offending vehicle is more apt to hit you lower in your body if you are sitting up higher. Shoulder/arm vs knee/leg injury, that sort of prognosis. Or it could be worse, such a wreck could flip a truck over... I'm not sure where they reinforce the doors for side-impact, usually there is a bar about the center for that. So it could be... unknown.

 

[gman2304]

Supton, In my scenario, it's the instant before the accident happens, it's going to happen, Whether I'm driving a Bugatti Veyron, your 2010 Tundra or the mentioned Honda Civic. They're is no time to react. Yes trucks are more top heavy and more susceptible to roll over and small nimble cars are more likely to allow you time and agility to avoid an accident in the first place. You state you don't feel safer in your truck. Of the 3 vehicles in your sig and judging from my scenario, that the accident IS going to happen, which vehicle would you choose to be in? I'll take my chances in your Tundra, as said hoping that the laws of physics kick in as mentioned. Thanks

 

[Smokescreen]

Originally Posted By: simple_gifts
The very existence of a market for add ons such as trucknutz in the US indicates that many large truck purchases have little to do with utility.

Not saying there isn't a need for a full sized and powerful pickup, but one will also notice that many commercial delivery box trucks are running around the US with 3 and 4.xL 4cyl diesels



The actual height of the truck bed is another blatantly obvious that it's for show rather than work. So many are chest high...you know the clods that are driving them aren't loading anything in there...LOL

 

[expat]

My Gut feeling is drivers in Europe are less preoccupied with vehicle Crash resistance than they are inNorth America.
I can only assume that is because, in Europe, for many years, small Cars were the Norm.
Whereas in NA very large cars were normal.

I also personally feel MUCH safer driving in Europe, even to the point where I will ride a bicycle, even in many European cities, whereas I feel a little edgy just riding into town in our small Canadian community.

Again, personally, I put great emforsis in driving a vehicle that can handle and manuover it's self out of a possible situation.
There will always be something on the road Bigger than me!

 

[supton]

Originally Posted By: gman2304
You state you don't feel safer in your truck. Of the 3 vehicles in your sig and judging from my scenario, that the accident IS going to happen, which vehicle would you choose to be in?


The scenario of, you're going to crash no matter what: probably my Jetta.

None of my three are "ancient", although the Jetta is clearly not new at 10 model years of age. All three have six airbags and modern crumple zones. So, any of the three are not bad. Yet, and perhaps this is a bit of fanboy coming out, the Jetta was designed for a market where vehicle speeds are much higher. The ability to deal with high(er) impact speed crashes IMO translates into better ability at low(er) speed impacts. [Using high and low here means stuff well below 100mph, nothing in NASCAR territory.]

If I were to ignore that bit, then I'd take the Camry, as being the newest-designed vehicle that would have been targeted at a buyer segment who do buy based upon these sorts of measurements. [I'm not actually sure what the current numbers look like for these three vehicles, but IIRC my Jetta was well rated back in its day. I believe the IIHS offset crashes are more recent test that my Jetta might be low rated on. If I get a chance I will take a look, but then we hit one of my pet peeves: a four star rated car for today cannot be compared to a five star vehicle from five years ago. I wish they would just add more stars, as not everyone shops only the new market. Grr...]

I just think my Tundra is more apt to do something stupid that is driver-induced. Like respond poorly to me sawing away at the wheel and coming around on me: or rolling over a guard rail; or simply launching that much farther into the woods. And no, it does not keep me awake at night; my chances of an accident are not that high, so I don't worry about such things when I get into any of these three. I just don't believe I am automatically safer in a larger vehicle--it is the package altogether, and it is possible to trade one metric for another.

 

[supton]

Originally Posted By: Smokescreen
The actual height of the truck bed is another blatantly obvious that it's for show rather than work. So many are chest high...you know the clods that are driving them aren't loading anything in there...LOL


I've thought of lowering my truck a couple of inches in the back, as I can't reach over the bed rails. Nor climb onto the tailgate w/o a stepstool (I carry to carry one in the back!). OTOH it's not a bad height to work on stuff at. Not crazy about the height but it sure is easy to crawl around under the truck.

 

[gman2304]

Supton, All of your vehicles did well in the crash tests I researched. The main reason I chose your Tundra over the others was the height and mass of the Tundra. As you indicated the type of injury one might receive in my crash scenario, I feel might be of the lower extremity type if in your Tundra, as opposed to head, neck, chest etc in your other vehicles. You mentioned a vehicle of the bulk of the offending vehicle might be as such to plow through the vehicle being hit. If the bulk of the energy is focused low, then the odds of receiving a fatal hit to the upper torso head etc are lessened in a taller, heavier vehicle. The odds of the Tundra rolling over post impact are greater, but surviving the initial impact is what I would be most concerned with. Thanks

 

[hattaresguy]

Mass helps...

 

[javacontour]

I think the last rental for about 10 days was just under $700 for that time period, taxes included.

Given that we put almost 2000 miles on the van, I think our cost/mile was about $0.50 including the gas we put in it. It wasn't too far off the current IRS reimbursement rate, IIRC.

Given TCO for most vehicles is in that range, for a long trip, it's a wash.

For a shorter trip, we would just take two cars. The teens wouldn't want to be without wheels for very long

 

[Number21]

Originally Posted By: Smokescreen
The actual height of the truck bed is another blatantly obvious that it's for show rather than work. So many are chest high...you know the clods that are driving them aren't loading anything in there...LOL


Wrong. I've got a pile of pallets in the back of my truck right now. And yeah, I lifted them all by hand up to chest height, which is the factory height of my tailgate. It also makes a perfect work platform. And it has a built in step. Yes, there are a lot of people who will never use their bed, but the majority of people that buy F350s do in fact use them at that height.

I also think it's funny that you guys are somehow linking size with efficiency. My old truck was a single cab 3/4 ton. Much smaller than my F350. Shorter in overall length and closer to the ground, weighs about 2000lbs less. Half the MPG!

 

[ls1mike]

Originally Posted By: supton
I think you had a bad egg too. Mine hasn't been the paradigm of reliability but it has done just about as expected: 100k of trouble free, and then about $1k in repairs per year after that. Albeit from driving 25-30k/year.



As I recall I spent a lot of time on the TDI board and the 02's suffered a lot. Lot of folks had the same problems as I did but they loved the car and were willing to live with it. Kind of like me and 80's turbo Dodges.

Mine had the following: the Carbon Build up twice, injector wiring harness and glow plug wiring harness issue. I had to replace the auto tranny at 35,000 miles, 2 sets of front wheel bearings, 4 neutral park safety switches, 1 set of glow plugs and bunch of stupid little things, mostly electrical. The interior stuff would not have bothered me if it had been more reliable. We gave up at 80,000 miles and bought an 03 CTS. 156,000 miles. Water pump, brakes, timing belt and 1 02 sensor. I should have kept it but the wife wanted the 07 Equinox we had.

Carbon. I had to do this job twice in 80,000 miles. Pull intake and EGR cooler. 4 to 6 hours of carb cleaner, wire brush and pressure washing good as new.

Thing that suck is I am meticulous about maintenance. I got the 505.01 oil and filters on line and changed the oil every 5000 miles. The other stuff I just could not prevent. So you can see why I am gun shy of diesels and anything VW anymore.
I don't think the Jetta we had felt any better than my goofy Buick.

The new VW stuff, especially the diesels,does look pretty promising though. Way off topic now.

 

[hattaresguy]

Originally Posted By: Number21
Originally Posted By: Smokescreen
The actual height of the truck bed is another blatantly obvious that it's for show rather than work. So many are chest high...you know the clods that are driving them aren't loading anything in there...LOL


Wrong. I've got a pile of pallets in the back of my truck right now. And yeah, I lifted them all by hand up to chest height, which is the factory height of my tailgate. It also makes a perfect work platform. And it has a built in step. Yes, there are a lot of people who will never use their bed, but the majority of people that buy F350s do in fact use them at that height.

I also think it's funny that you guys are somehow linking size with efficiency. My old truck was a single cab 3/4 ton. Much smaller than my F350. Shorter in overall length and closer to the ground, weighs about 2000lbs less. Half the MPG!


How much fun is it humping 200lb generators into that thing or trying to get a tool out of it when you can't reach over the side.

High trucks impede loading, I dislike jacked trucks. Something like a 1980 F350 is about where a 1 ton should ride, but that was before all the accountants started to pay $60k for them.

Older trucks were nice you could actually reach over the side and pull a toolbox out of the bed without killing yourself!

 

[bmwjohn]

every time I have seen a pic of a service call in Europe that required a tow truck - like F250 with Holmes bed, it turns out to be a Land Rover or similar with a trailer to put the car on. Leave the trailer at the shop when not in use, I presume. That attitude certainly cuts the truck demand. I would assume the Lowes/ HD analogue would involve a similar setup, if not a hatchback / station wagon.

 

[Number21]

Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
How much fun is it humping 200lb generators into that thing or trying to get a tool out of it when you can't reach over the side.

High trucks impede loading, I dislike jacked trucks. Something like a 1980 F350 is about where a 1 ton should ride, but that was before all the accountants started to pay $60k for them.

Older trucks were nice you could actually reach over the side and pull a toolbox out of the bed without killing yourself!


If you gotta lift it into the bed a few inches here or there doesn't make much difference. They have all sort of steps for these trucks, fixed and automatic folding, that help you get in the doors, up to the bed, beside the bed, tailgate, where ever you want to put them. My old truck was much lower to the ground but it also had a canopy, which is oh so common. With that you can't reach over any side even with a ladder!

It also means I ride above most other traffic with a much better view.

 

[Silk]

It's funny how this thread has gone from ''Those weird Europeans who don't drive a decent sized truck'' to Americans defending their use of outsized trucks. Why do you need to defend your choice?...it's almost like a gun thread where you defend your right to bear arms, it's like a one sided argument with yourselves.