Which truck

[WyoElk]

My tundra 2006 DC has the 4.7 V8, running to town I average 16, on trips 17-20 mpg.

Same here on my 06 DC tundra. No problems whatsoever with mine and I'm confident that I'm driving this truck to at least 275K. I'm at 127K now with just timing belt and shocks and struts. I try to be meticulous about maintenance and I'm pretty easy on it but one hunting season comes around it gets used pretty hard.

 

[Blinginpse]

Whatever ya get remember diesels don't go as good as a gas truck. Most don't know or realize that. Diesels have there purpose and most don't need them that do have them

 

[ahlgringo]

Whatever ya get remember diesels don't go as good as a gas truck. Most don't know or realize that. Diesels have there purpose and most don't need them that do have them

Would have to disagree with this post. Not sure what "don't go as good as gas truck" means. They get better mpg, tow more, and last A LOT longer. Yes they are heavier up front- but plenty of guys run them down any trail a gasser will go. Would be happy to talk specifics but the three above principles are almost universally true. Not for everyone but would not throw a blanket statement like this out there. And yes I am a diesel owner- 01' Ram 2500 with 5.9 Cummins. 180k and rollin.

 

[Blinginpse]

Would have to disagree with this post. Not sure what "don't go as good as gas truck" means. They get better mpg, tow more, and last A LOT longer. Yes they are heavier up front- but plenty of guys run them down any trail a gasser will go. Would be happy to talk specifics but the three above principles are almost universally true. Not for everyone but would not throw a blanket statement like this out there. And yes I am a diesel owner- 01' Ram 2500 with 5.9 Cummins. 180k and rollin.

Don't go as good means you will get stuck in a diesel before a gas. The mpg hauling and longevity are correct. Not arguing that at all. But you also will pay more for a diesel upfront, oil changes, and parts, plus fuel filters and DEF.

I don't own a diesel but could utilize there purpose. My 2005 6.0 gas has 202,000 working miles and gets around 13-15mpg. About 10 when hooked to cattle trailer or flat bed. For Upkeep ive put couple wheel bearings in it and a starter. New plugs and wires too. And Rollin.

 

[PNWGATOR]

06 Tundra DC w/215k and have only done tires, fluids, filters, belts and hoses. Going to put 500k on her if I can.
Also, don't buy a diesel unless you NEED a diesel. Needless expense to purchase, own and maintain not to mention a pita to drive around town with a rough ride and slipping into parking spots.

 

[ahlgringo]

Don't go as good means you will get stuck in a diesel before a gas. The mpg hauling and longevity are correct. Not arguing that at all. But you also will pay more for a diesel upfront, oil changes, and parts, plus fuel filters and DEF.

I don't own a diesel but could utilize there purpose. My 2005 6.0 gas has 202,000 working miles and gets around 13-15mpg. About 10 when hooked to cattle trailer or flat bed. For Upkeep ive put couple wheel bearings in it and a starter. New plugs and wires too. And Rollin.

Really don't want this to turn into a ford vs chevy debate. I will agree they are heavier up front- getting stuck has a lot more confounding factors than just that though (suspension, clearance, tread, differential type, etc). All other things being equal- yes a diesel is heavier and will get stuck easier in deep mud- simple physics. My point is that there are way too many other factors in play to make such a broad stroked statement. I am happy you have had good results with your truck- statistics would say you are in the minority.

As always though- to each their own

 

[Blinginpse]

Really don't want this to turn into a ford vs chevy debate. I will agree they are heavier up front- getting stuck has a lot more confounding factors than just that though (suspension, clearance, tread, differential type, etc). All other things being equal- yes a diesel is heavier and will get stuck easier in deep mud- simple physics. My point is that there are way too many other factors in play to make such a broad stroked statement. I am happy you have had good results with your truck- statistics would say you are in the minority.

As always though- to each their own

Yep agreed no arguing intended was just stating that some see what you mentioned and get shocked by it and don't look at the smaller details.

I myself am in the debate of gas again or break down and pay for the diesel. I'm due 1 but what buy any solid used truck for May as well get a new 1. The gas has severed me well but hauling big loads of cattle and hay I lack power. But for cost on diesel truck vs gas truck then upkeep and so forth it's hard to justify the difference. Sometimes I feel as bad as a woman lol

 

[WRO]

How do you like it?

I love it, we'll see how it tows my boat..

Its rated for 5500 lbs towing, i know it will kick ass in the woods.

 

[iflyils]

Now you just need a Harrop E locker for the Front I got one and it has been awesome'

 

[ben h]

Unfortunately, I too will be in the truck market in the near future. It's refreshing to hear I'm not the only person who has been screwed with the tiny gas tank problem. You'd never think of it till you've had one of those damn things. Whilst in college I had a 1993 Nissan with a 2.4L motor which was actually about 2x as gutless as you'd think, got horrible gas mileage (considering), was expensive to repair and they topped it off with a 12 gallon gas tank; it couldn't pull a greasy string out of a cats ass. I bet the engineers had tears running down their faces from laughing as they designed the most retarded truck the world has ever seen. Because of that truck, I don't think I could even ride in a Nissan let alone buy one no matter what motor they put in it.

I now have a 2007 GMC 1500 with around 140k on it, but they were all really fast so it doesn't have that many hours on it. It has the 5.3L motor and I get around 15-16 mpg (it used to be 17-18 on a consistent basis and my record was 22 mpg on a trip to N. Dakota pheasant hunting, but that was an anomaly, never to be repeated). All of our work trucks have been Fords the oldest being a 99 with the 7.3L diesel and it has 340k miles on it and hates starting in the cold. I'm leaning towards another 1500 or F150. They seem like sports cars compared to the 99' F350. Anybody have any experience with the Eco boost?

Thanks,
ben

 

[WRO]

Unfortunately, I too will be in the truck market in the near future. It's refreshing to hear I'm not the only person who has been screwed with the tiny gas tank problem. You'd never think of it till you've had one of those damn things. Whilst in college I had a 1993 Nissan with a 2.4L motor which was actually about 2x as gutless as you'd think, got horrible gas mileage (considering), was expensive to repair and they topped it off with a 12 gallon gas tank; it couldn't pull a greasy string out of a cats ass. I bet the engineers had tears running down their faces from laughing as they designed the most retarded truck the world has ever seen. Because of that truck, I don't think I could even ride in a Nissan let alone buy one no matter what motor they put in it.

I now have a 2007 GMC 1500 with around 140k on it, but they were all really fast so it doesn't have that many hours on it. It has the 5.3L motor and I get around 15-16 mpg (it used to be 17-18 on a consistent basis and my record was 22 mpg on a trip to N. Dakota pheasant hunting, but that was an anomaly, never to be repeated). All of our work trucks have been Fords the oldest being a 99 with the 7.3L diesel and it has 340k miles on it and hates starting in the cold. I'm leaning towards another 1500 or F150. They seem like sports cars compared to the 99' F350. Anybody have any experience with the Eco boost?

Thanks,
ben

I had a 2010 5.4 that was a giant pile of shit, 3 times on a tow truck in 100K miles and probably 10K in repairs. I purchased it new. I have friends with the ecoboost, and most have had problems, either minor or major.

Comfort and road noise were great on my ford, ground clearance sucked although it was marginally capable off road.

If you only plan to keep it for like 60-80K, I'd get one, if you want to get 150K buy a different truck..

 

[tipsntails7]

I had a 2010 5.4 that was a giant pile of shit, 3 times on a tow truck in 100K miles and probably 10K in repairs. I purchased it new. I have friends with the ecoboost, and most have had problems, either minor or major.

Comfort and road noise were great on my ford, ground clearance sucked although it was marginally capable off road.

If you only plan to keep it for like 60-80K, I'd get one, if you want to get 150K buy a different truck..

Agreed, my dad had nothing but problems with the Eco boost as well.
Now he's got the V8 and has loved it sense the day he traded that Eco in.

I've had my Titan for 3 years, just rolled over 60K and have not had a single problem. 12-13 in town, 15-17 mixed. If you stay at 55 mph on the highway it gets damn near 20.

With that said I would not touch a brand new 2016. First model year, and they want WAY to much for it.

 

[LandYacht]

Just turned over 60k on my ecoboost and have never had a problem with it. I like it more than my 2010 Tundra Crew Max and that's saying something because I really loved that Tundra.

The 6.5 foot bed vs the baby 5 foot bed on the Tundra really is the big difference. The eco will is just plain fast and powerful and I get 5 mpg better than I did with the Tundra, 15 mpg vs 20mpg.

Buy the truck that you like the best and then drive the Heck out of it, can't go wrong really. We all have our preferences to share, but in the end your butt is the one in your truck lol