TR Forums

After finally letting go of my old beloved 80 Chev Silverado, I finally found a replacement that I hope will last me even 1/2 as long. Mostly complete with the add ons, just have to find some bed rails and grill inserts. Looking at these for those:

http://www.cloud-rider.com/images/linkages/29-1054_.jpg

http://www.putco.com/products.cfm?actio ... rtSearch=1



Had to go 4x4 this time because of the flooding on the farm issue otherwise I would have gone with a 2 wheel drive again. It's amazingly hard to find regular cab trucks that are not base no frills white fleet trucks in stock now days, everything is extended/crewcab (to appeal to the soccer mom's I suppose). One thing that I noticed is that most of the add ons now from 3rd parties are simply bolt on vs the drill to fit of yester years (plus finding stuff for a regular cab is quite a bit harder). It is nice to just "bolt in place" but man have the price of accessories gone up since trucks are not only for the working man.

One thing I don't miss however from my old 80 is the fuel consumption. Took the same trip that would have eaten a tank in that thing with this new one and there still was 3/4's a tank left.

That's a sweet looking ride but it saddens me how a pickup must be covered in pretty chromed plastic to appeal to the soccer moms and suffer with paltry ground clearance at the front because of that low "street style" nose.

What's the point in trucks having great ground clearance from the front axle backwards if they still grind their nose on speed humps?

Chrispy_ wrote:

That's a sweet looking ride but it saddens me how a pickup must be covered in pretty chromed plastic to appeal to the soccer moms and suffer with paltry ground clearance at the front because of that low "street style" nose.

What's the point in trucks having great ground clearance from the front axle backwards if they still grind their nose on speed humps?

Actually it helps with fuel economy. Probably adds a whole 1MPG...

I totally agree though, how the heck are you gonna get through a snow drift without tearing your cowl off?!

You're probably supposed to tear the cowl off

I always though a Bowler Nemesis had the most businesslike front end:



Sadly, even our most off-road capable cars are starting to get the lower-slung "road bumpers" now as well, thanks to
rich city folk buying them instead of MPV's/minivans/whatever you call 6+ seater people-carriers in the US:



If we're getting Formula 1 technology trickling down to our road cars, why aren't we getting Rally Raid tech trickling down to our trucks and 4x4's?

Deanjo wrote:

It's amazingly hard to find regular cab trucks that are not base no frills white fleet trucks in stock now days, everything is extended/crewcab (to appeal to the soccer mom's I suppose). One thing that I noticed is that most of the add ons now from 3rd parties are simply bolt on vs the drill to fit of yester years (plus finding stuff for a regular cab is quite a bit harder). It is nice to just "bolt in place" but man have the price of accessories gone up since trucks are not only for the working man.

These trucks are configured for soccer moms and weekend warriors. All of the manufacturers now assume that if you're using it for business or farming, you'll be looking for either the "cost effective" base model fleet trucks; or, you'll be looking at the bigger 3/4 and 1 ton models. Anyone buying the nicer trucks for work is either management or dual purposing the vehicle (using it part-time as a family car). After years of fiddling with pricing, options, and doing market research, this is where Chevy, Ford, Dodge, Toyota and Nissan have all landed. You're not fitting into their market demographics.

The bolt in place stuff is nice -- but again, they're trying to make it easy for the target market, soccer moms and weekend warriors. People who may not have a 1/2 drill.

Deanjo wrote:

One thing I don't miss however from my old 80 is the fuel consumption. Took the same trip that would have eaten a tank in that thing with this new one and there still was 3/4's a tank left.

You'll see them continue to improve. EPA wants 54 mpg fleet average in 2025, including light trucks. That mean trucks will have to have EPA averages of mid-20's or better. The manufacturers are taking this seriously. We're seeing more requests where I work for sensors to help improve the fuel consumption. Ford announced they're building the F-150 body out of aluminum beginning with the 2015 model year, which will give them another 6~7 mpg thanks to weight reduction.

disclaimers:
I'm an engineer, working for a company that supplies sensors to automotive OEMs, but I've worked in auto shops and on a small farm when I was younger.
I am a bit of a truck guy, I learned to drive in a '65 C-20 and I'm restoring a '71 C-10. I stopped driving the old 6 cylinder Dodge pickup I had, sold it, and now drive a compact car when I don't need a truck.

mnecaise wrote:

Ford announced they're building the F-150 body out of aluminum beginning with the 2015 model year, which will give them another 6~7 mpg thanks to weight reduction.

The hood on this one happens to be made of aluminum. I also noticed that the front wheel wells are a composite instead of metal as well.

Chrispy_ wrote:

That's a sweet looking ride but it saddens me how a pickup must be covered in pretty chromed plastic to appeal to the soccer moms and suffer with paltry ground clearance at the front because of that low "street style" nose.

What's the point in trucks having great ground clearance from the front axle backwards if they still grind their nose on speed humps?

The picture is a bit deceiving. No worries about grinding the nose on speed bumps or curbs. It has the same amount of clearance as the lowest part of rear axle housing.

Deanjo wrote:

mnecaise wrote:

Ford announced they're building the F-150 body out of aluminum beginning with the 2015 model year, which will give them another 6~7 mpg thanks to weight reduction.

The hood on this one happens to be made of aluminum. I also noticed that the front wheel wells are a composite instead of metal as well.

Sounds about right. 100lbs = 1mpg; so, every pound they can safely remove, is going to get tossed out. Chevy had experimented with making the entire box out of composites. I wouldn't be surprised to find they start making that standard. What would be really cool, would be to see wood floors in the bed get re-introduced. It's not as rugged, admittedly, but I happen to like the look. I'm planning to pull the rusty steel floor out of the bed of my '71 and replacing it with wood.

mnecaise wrote:

I'm planning to pull the rusty steel floor out of the bed of my '71 and replacing it with wood.

There are many first-gen Toyota pickups (never actually named HiLux here in the US) here in VT whose rust-cancered beds have been replaced by pressure-treated 2x6. Adventurous types add 4x4 PT bumpers. You simply cannot kill the mechanicals on those '70s/'80s Toyota pickups.

With all the aluminum cans we recycle, it seems like it ought to be economically feasible to make better use of aluminum for auto bodies. I imagine there's a potential galvanic corrosion issue though, since there will still be a lot of steel as well. Need to make sure the aluminum is electrically isolated from the steel.

just brew it! wrote:

With all the aluminum cans we recycle, it seems like it ought to be economically feasible to make better use of aluminum for auto bodies. I imagine there's a potential galvanic corrosion issue though, since there will still be a lot of steel as well. Need to make sure the aluminum is electrically isolated from the steel.

Not as big of an issue as you think. Aluminum and steel have been used together for years in automotive and aircraft.

Deanjo wrote:

just brew it! wrote:

With all the aluminum cans we recycle, it seems like it ought to be economically feasible to make better use of aluminum for auto bodies. I imagine there's a potential galvanic corrosion issue though, since there will still be a lot of steel as well. Need to make sure the aluminum is electrically isolated from the steel.

Not as big of an issue as you think. Aluminum and steel have been used together for years in automotive and aircraft.

For automotive it has been primarily used for internal engine components. For aircraft it is used as the outer skin (which, unlike in an automobile, wraps all the way around). Either way, you don't have aluminum and steel in close proximity where they are constantly exposed to the elements.

just brew it! wrote:

Deanjo wrote:

just brew it! wrote:

With all the aluminum cans we recycle, it seems like it ought to be economically feasible to make better use of aluminum for auto bodies. I imagine there's a potential galvanic corrosion issue though, since there will still be a lot of steel as well. Need to make sure the aluminum is electrically isolated from the steel.

Not as big of an issue as you think. Aluminum and steel have been used together for years in automotive and aircraft.

For automotive it has been primarily used for internal engine components. For aircraft it is used as the outer skin (which, unlike in an automobile, wraps all the way around). Either way, you don't have aluminum and steel in close proximity where they are constantly exposed to the elements.

It may wrap all around but it is not one contiguous piece on aircraft nor is it limited to the outer skin. Farm machinery as well has used it in many areas.

GM car? Don't forget to let the dealer fix stuff related to recalls - ignition switches, exploding airbags, random transmission software glitches (supposedly shifts to "neutral" at random time) or whatever else that is wrong with every GM car produced during last 10 years

Deanjo wrote:

It may wrap all around but it is not one contiguous piece on aircraft nor is it limited to the outer skin.

For galvanic corrosion, what matters is whether you've got dissimilar metals exposed to the elements with a conduction path between them. Internal components that aren't exposed don't count.

For automotive use, you also have the added complication of road salt (in northern climates). Salt water spray makes a great electrolyte. Any exposed steel/aluminum interfaces will rot away in fairly short order.

Captain Ned wrote:

mnecaise wrote:

I'm planning to pull the rusty steel floor out of the bed of my '71 and replacing it with wood.

There are many first-gen Toyota pickups (never actually named HiLux here in the US) here in VT whose rust-cancered beds have been replaced by pressure-treated 2x6. Adventurous types add 4x4 PT bumpers. You simply cannot kill the mechanicals on those '70s/'80s Toyota pickups.

Wood bed was standard in Chevrolet trucks until '67 when they started introducing corrugated steel beds. The beds were southern pine with steel strips between the boards. The wood bed continued to be available as an option through '71 or '72. Since road salt and time have taken their toll (what Chevy doesn't have rust on it?) I plan to replace it with the classic wood bed, which ironically will cost more than buying a new factory steel bed.

Seen many of those stock woodies. Nice bit about the Toyota is that wasn't ever stock, so cheap PT was all you needed.

just brew it! wrote:

Deanjo wrote:

It may wrap all around but it is not one contiguous piece on aircraft nor is it limited to the outer skin.

For galvanic corrosion, what matters is whether you've got dissimilar metals exposed to the elements with a conduction path between them. Internal components that aren't exposed don't count.

For automotive use, you also have the added complication of road salt (in northern climates). Salt water spray makes a great electrolyte. Any exposed steel/aluminum interfaces will rot away in fairly short order.

Audi would disagree with you, they have been using aluminum bodies since 1994 and Mazda is even able to weld aluminum to steel (as used in their RX-8).

mnecaise wrote:

Since road salt and time have taken their toll (what Chevy doesn't have rust on it?) I plan to replace it with the classic wood bed, which ironically will cost more than buying a new factory steel bed.

My old 80 was rust free right up until I got rid of it last year. The body was still flawless. The only reason that I got rid of it was because the power train was simply worn out. The guy that bought it was blown away that all he had to to is prime and paint after replacing the power train.

Audi uses a lot of aluminum. Ford, however, has made the largest commitment to aluminum yet, going with an aluminum body on the 2015 version of the most popular vehicle in North America.

Deanjo wrote:

mnecaise wrote:

Since road salt and time have taken their toll (what Chevy doesn't have rust on it?) I plan to replace it with the classic wood bed, which ironically will cost more than buying a new factory steel bed.

My old 80 was rust free right up until I got rid of it last year. The body was still flawless. The only reason that I got rid of it was because the power train was simply worn out. The guy that bought it was blown away that all he had to to is prime and paint after replacing the power train.

Impressive. Clearly you took good care of it. Well done sir. Well done.

mnecaise wrote:

Deanjo wrote:

mnecaise wrote:

Since road salt and time have taken their toll (what Chevy doesn't have rust on it?) I plan to replace it with the classic wood bed, which ironically will cost more than buying a new factory steel bed.

My old 80 was rust free right up until I got rid of it last year. The body was still flawless. The only reason that I got rid of it was because the power train was simply worn out. The guy that bought it was blown away that all he had to to is prime and paint after replacing the power train.

Impressive. Clearly you took good care of it. Well done sir. Well done.

I can't stress the importance of regular proper washing and regular inspection and clearing of drainage holes enough. I've never had rust on any of my GM's over the decades. The Fords and Toyotas I've had the other hand....

Deanjo wrote:

I can't stress the importance of regular proper washing and regular inspection and clearing of drainage holes enough. I've never had rust on any of my GM's over the decades. The Fords and Toyotas I've had the other hand....

I never saw the reason to install the drain plugs on the '78 AMC CJ-5. Oh how I miss that beastie, as a fair bit of John Mellencamp's "Jack & Diane" took place in it. Even remembering enough to type this post causes acute pain in my lower back.

JohnC wrote:

GM car? Don't forget to let the dealer fix stuff related to recalls - ignition switches, exploding airbags, random transmission software glitches (supposedly shifts to "neutral" at random time) or whatever else that is wrong with every GM car produced during last 10 years

No recalls for my truck.

Chrispy_ wrote:

Sadly, even our most off-road capable cars are starting to get the lower-slung "road bumpers" now as well, thanks to
rich city folk buying them instead of MPV's/minivans/whatever you call 6+ seater people-carriers in the US:

I always thought the main reason for this was safety regulations. Bumpers on vehicles have to have even a little bit of overlap with each other in order to provide safety in a collision, and since car bumpers are pretty low, regulations have forced truck bumpers to come down as well.

Hmph...I managed to kill the front bumper of my sedan 4 days after buying it on the sort of weaksauce snowplow ridge I used to fearlessly charge through in an Oldsmobile so I don't have nice things to say about those low-hanging 'street bumpers' either.

mnecaise wrote:

What would be really cool, would be to see wood floors in the bed get re-introduced. It's not as rugged, admittedly, but I happen to like the look. I'm planning to pull the rusty steel floor out of the bed of my '71 and replacing it with wood.

We don't use trucks over here, pretty exclusively stick to vans (rains too much for open trucks) but it's rare to ever see a van that hasn't had a plywood kit fitted.

Deanjo wrote:

JohnC wrote:

GM car? Don't forget to let the dealer fix stuff related to recalls - ignition switches, exploding airbags, random transmission software glitches (supposedly shifts to "neutral" at random time) or whatever else that is wrong with every GM car produced during last 10 years

No recalls for my truck.

Not yet

Personally I'd rather go with something like regular cab F250 XL (with 4x4, of course) for all utility needs (including snow removal using something like 7'6" Boss straight blade) for one of our business locations. Not that I have unhealthy obsession over the Ford brand (I don't), I just like to minimize the chance of someone getting killed by undeployed airbag during serious collision or getting the neck arteries slashed by metal debris from exploded airbag during very minor collision (GM used these Takata-sourced airbags on some of their models) or whatever other defect on random GM vehicle that WILL appear during next few months

JohnC wrote:

Not yet

Personally I'd rather go with something like regular cab F250 XL (with 4x4, of course) for all utility needs (including snow removal using something like 7'6" Boss straight blade) for one of our business locations. Not that I have unhealthy obsession over the Ford brand (I don't), I just like to minimize the chance of someone getting killed by undeployed airbag during serious collision or getting the neck arteries slashed by metal debris from exploded airbag during very minor collision (GM used these Takata-sourced airbags on some of their models) or whatever other defect on random GM vehicle that WILL appear during next few months

The problem is that you think that Ford (or any other manufacturer) is that much better. The biggest reason for the GM recalls has been because they are now going the opposite extreme since they were under investigation. Toyota got caught a few years ago, now GM and Ford and Dodge have been recalling like mad lately as well.

Deanjo wrote:

The problem is that you think that Ford (or any other manufacturer) is that much better.

Aren't they? Sure, Ford also recalls stuff like a million of old Escapes, Explorers and Taurus models (which they did last month) but at least I don't see "<insert random 6-digit number> vehicles recalled" being posted every couple of weeks affecting most of models and I don't see any investigation uncovering the FACT that current upper management knew about some major defect since 2005 but casually let the people continue being killed up until this year How much of total vehicles GM recalled this year alone? 17 million? How many more millions until the end of the year? Another dozen or so?

Thanks, but I'd rather take chances with anything NOT made by GM (Ford, Dodge - doesn't make much difference)