What base model 4x4 truck would you buy?

[weaponoffreedom]

New, cash.

Well I have no recommendations with that budget for new. Maybe a Tacoma?

For much less than budget, you could find a higher mileage, rust free 2003-2006 2500HD chevy, put all new engine, tranny, tcase, have the axles rebuilt, new brakes etc......for much less than 45k, and you would have a truck much better than anything you could buy today.

I understand that was not fully the question, just a suggestion.

 

[hemioiler]

I believe I've seen every truck listed here and trashed shortly after by other guys. Seems like a great consensus, not sure what OP was hoping for.

The best advice so far was: buy something old-ish, buy based on the deal you find (mileage, condition, price). It's a beater, not a going-to-town rig. Doesn't matter what brand you get they'll all do the job and every dealer has mechanics where they're fixing stuff that broke. I'd also add, buy something without turbos, simpler engines are best for longevity.

 

[Elkins45]

This might well be the last truck I ever buy. I would like it to be new regardless of whether It's a good financial decision.

If I don’t spend it then my widow or her second husband will.

 

[weaponoffreedom]

Prior to 2024 the XL Supercab Ranger (6ft bed) would have done all that, but they killed off the SCAB and are SuperCrew (5ft bed) only now. Powertrain is plenty capable and with the same 10R80 that's in the F150's the driveline is under-stressed.

I prefer the midsized trucks, easier to get around in and park when you're using them as a family hauler.

Of course, there's always the 2 door Rm Tradesman with the V6 that Legend has it can be found for cheap if you can find one. I browsed through AutoTrader looking for new ones and every time I went to the actual dealer's website, the one I clicked on was nowhere to be found and usually there was something similar, but for much more money.

View attachment 185574

then tack on 30% dealer markup. i would be interested if one could really even obtain a vehicle like that.

This might well be the last truck I ever buy. I would like it to be new regardless of whether It's a good financial decision.

If I don’t spend it then my widow or her second husband will.

do you still have your gmt400 chevy truck?

 

[DuckRyder]

Of note for 2024 F150 - the 2.7 EB is the base engine in the XL the 3.3 is no more. You cant get a 3.5 EB in an STX.

The 2.7 EB in the ranger is probably going to be delayed until jan/feb it may not even maki in the 24 model year according to some chatter...

 

[Elkins45]

do you still have your gmt400 chevy truck?

I still have it but it doesn’t run. It hasn’t started in about a year. Even if it did the suspension is so corroded I wouldn’t trust it to carry anything of value.

 

[ctechbob]

Of note for 2024 F150 - the 2.7 EB is the base engine in the XL the 3.3 is no more. You cant get a 3.5 EB in an STX.

The 2.7 EB in the ranger is probably going to be delayed until jan/feb it may not even maki in the 24 model year according to some chatter...

Ford really f-ed up the F-150 line this year IMO. If I was going to upgrade to an F150 it was going to be a 2.7 with all the tow goodies and max tow package. Can't get that anymore. I don't even think you can get a decent set of tow mirrors on an F150 now without upgrading to the 3.5 and the max tow package on that.

 

[MNgopher]

I don't think max tow has ever been availible on the 2.7. That's always been 3.5 eco or 5.0 territory.

There has been a payload package for the 2.7, but that is not the same as max tow.

 

[4WD]

Ford really f-ed up the F-150 line this year IMO. If I was going to upgrade to an F150 it was going to be a 2.7 with all the tow goodies and max tow package. Can't get that anymore. I don't even think you can get a decent set of tow mirrors on an F150 now without upgrading to the 3.5 and the max tow package on that.

View attachment 185818
View attachment 185819

When I was looking at basic 150/1500’s in 2018 it was rare to find an F150 with a rear locker whereas they were very common in GM’s …
The F150 is also the most common to find stuck where I go …

 

[DuckRyder]

Ford really f-ed up the F-150 line this year IMO. If I was going to upgrade to an F150 it was going to be a 2.7 with all the tow goodies and max tow package. Can't get that anymore. I don't even think you can get a decent set of tow mirrors on an F150 now without upgrading to the 3.5 and the max tow package on that.

I agree i don't like the new packaging.

You also can ge the good stuff (like a Torsen front, cool bumper) on a base tremor, you have to go tremor high which has a bunch of stuff i don't want....

Max tow has always been a 3.5 or 5.0 thing, but they took away the payload package on the 2.7 and i don understand why you can get a 3.5 in an XL but not an STX...

It is mental.

 

[ctechbob]

I don't think max tow has ever been availible on the 2.7. That's always been 3.5 eco or 5.0 territory.

There has been a payload package for the 2.7, but that is not the same as max tow.

Oops, my bad, I meant the 2.7 payload package.

You still can't get a decent set of towing mirrors on a 2.7. Not a big deal to some, but IMO you really need them to tow a travel trailer:

 

[Elkins45]

Oops, my bad, I meant the 2.7 payload package.

You still can't get a decent set of towing mirrors on a 2.7. Not a big deal to some, but IMO you really need them to tow a travel trailer:

View attachment 185829

Isn’t this something you can source aftermarket fairly easily?

 

[ctechbob]

Isn’t this something you can source aftermarket fairly easily?

I'd probably just order OEM ones, but still, you used to be able to spec them, but they're now forcing you into more expensive trucks for them.

Also, not unheard of for a base model XL to need to pull a trailer and want tow mirrors. Landscapers around here pull enclosed trailers all the time, I'm sure they don't want to buy $60,000 trucks.

 

[meep]

Ok. Let’s review the requirements:

4wd
occassional use
pull 1300 lb fishing boat
occassional towing of 4000 lb tractor on a trailer, 5 miles
bed for utility use
40k budget

plenty of late model ford rangers on Carmax in the 30s. Spend 2k more for their 3 year warranty, which I found to be excellent here.

a. They are really nice trucks
b. They won’t rob you at the gas pump
c. They have the goods when you need them
d. It’s nice enough to enjoy daily
e. You might really like it!
f. not too big to make regular errands a pain
g. You get to enjoy newer tech like CarPlay or android auto, which a decade old used truck won’t have
h. Carmax warranty for peace of mind, since it is used.
i. Double check nhtsa or iihs safety ratings… the late model f150s score top marks in safety- if the same values are included in the ranger design, it should fare well too.

 

[JTK]

Nissan Titan. Doesn't have start-stop or cylinder deactivation. I've had good luck with Nissan products in the past, but don't know if they are as good as they used to be.

https://www.cars.com/vehicledetail/42b57a41-c813-46b0-b58a-412adb0629eb/

Good call on the lack of start-stop and cyl deactivation. Plus the newer Titans have the 9spd AT, which should help the MPGs some. There was someone here that got a new Armada recently for around $45K after discounts.

Nissan did add start/stop tech to the 2023 Frontier, where my 2022 doesn't have it. The 2023's do have an off button for the start/stop that you have to press every restart.

My regular commute is luckily such that I can maximize MPGs out of what ever I drive. With my 2022 Frontier crew cab, 4x4, S-model w/ pro 4x sized tires and the front air dam removed, I still get 23mpg tank to tank hand calc'd. Same MPGs I got with my pentastar powered 2017 Ram 1500 QC, 4x4. That configuration Ram would be my other recommendation for the OP for the $40K range.

 

[Elkins45]

I did some investigating of the Ford Ranger but it looks like the only engine option is a 2.3L turbo? I’m fairly turbo adverse on anything except diesel tractors. Does that engine have much of a history?

 

[MParr]

I did some investigating of the Ford Ranger but it looks like the only engine option is a 2.3L turbo? I’m fairly turbo adverse on anything except diesel tractors. Does that engine have much of a history?

The 2.3 Ecoboost goes back to 2015. It’s in several Ford vehicles. Mustang, Ranger, Explorer.
Early 2.3 engines had head gasket problems and overheating.

Common Ford 2.3 EcoBoost Engine Problems and Reliability

Learn about Ford 2.3 Ecoboost common problems including carbon build-up and head gasket failure. Is the 2.3 EcoBoost reliable?

tuningpro.co

2.3L EcoBoost Engine - In-Depth Look at Design and Reliability

What is the 2.3L EcoBoost Engine? Is it good or bad? Read about Ford 2.3L EcoBoost Engine design and features, its the most common problems and relaibility.

www.motorreviewer.com

 

[meep]

If I understand right, the head gasket problems were specific to that engine’s use in the focus RS. My coworker had one the first year they came out, and ford took specific interest in his HG failure, and made it right. In that car, the 2.3 was tuned aggressively, and he had an additional tune on it that outpowered the oem clutch. back when I was reading up on it, the failure wasn’t showing in the ranger. Having driven that engine in an explorer, I really liked it. while it needed to rev some, they coordinated its behavior with the transmission very well.

I prefer the turbo for tow duty… lots of torque down low where I want it.

 

[mr_boring]

Oops, my bad, I meant the 2.7 payload package.

You still can't get a decent set of towing mirrors on a 2.7. Not a big deal to some, but IMO you really need them to tow a travel trailer:

View attachment 185829

I have a 2.7 - I wouldn't tow a travel trailer period unless it was some little short 4000 lb job that's going to end up 6000 loaded. Even on a 'stripped down' 2.7 with a decent payload (which I admittedly do not have, it's a heavy pig with 3.55's) it just ain't enough to do it often. The 2.7 PP is kabooky IMO. I do think you can still, or could still as of last year, get that option in Canada.

Just because Ford, Chevy, and the other companies tell you your 1/2 ton (or less - looking at you Ranger and Tacoma gang) truck is rated for 7500 or 11000 doesn't mean you should.

 

[ctechbob]

If I understand right, the head gasket problems were specific to that engine’s use in the focus RS. My coworker had one the first year they came out, and ford took specific interest in his HG failure, and made it right. In that car, the 2.3 was tuned aggressively, and he had an additional tune on it that outpowered the oem clutch. back when I was reading up on it, the failure wasn’t showing in the ranger. Having driven that engine in an explorer, I really liked it. while it needed to rev some, they coordinated its behavior with the transmission very well.

I prefer the turbo for tow duty… lots of torque down low where I want it.

Can confirm that the 2.3 is a small beast of a motor. Headgasket problems are pretty much non-existent in this version of the 2.3.

I'm just at 4000 miles towed with our travel trailer and it pulls just as good now as when we started, and that's pulling about 5800-6000 pounds.