PSDF350
Senior Member
This is where I bought my currt truck back in 04. No 150's listed but you get the idea. http://www.truckpaper.com/list/list.aspx?ETID=1&pcid=2000711535&bcatid=27&dlr=1
-
Thank you for visiting HeavyEquipmentForums.com! Our objective is to provide industry professionals a place to gather to exchange questions, answers and ideas. We welcome you to register using the "Register" icon at the top of the page. We'd appreciate any help you can offer in spreading the word of our new site. The more members that join, the bigger resource for all to enjoy. Thank you!
Pickups
- Thread starter Scrub Puller
- Start date
willie59
Administrator
Hi Scrub Puller, this isn't a basic F-150, but one with all the bells and whistles.
http://www.lancecunninghamford.com/new/Ford/2010-Ford-F-150-ed8b41830a0a0002000ee9207fd6bf9f.htm
It appears to me that Aussies use their trucks in their functional manner, meaning built to work out of. I think in the states, pickups are just an extension of cars the auto makers build. Hard to say when, but it's arguable that by the time the 1950's came around, US auto makers began putting a lot of emphasis into body style of autos with each new year model, each auto maker trying to make their cars with more eye appeal than their competition. That trend remains today with the auto makers. Pickups, on the other hand, were built for work back in the 30's right up to the late 50's. Then the auto makers started building pickups with body style like they did their cars. Chevy had the Fleetside, Ford had the Styleside. Yes, you could say this move took pickups away from their intended role...to work out of, and instead pickups were more about style and comfort. But we kinda embraced the improvements coming in pickups, to the point you'd be hard pressed to find even a basic pickup now that doesn't have air conditioning. But we still work out of them. Every day you see guys moving around with their work gear in the bed of the truck. Sure, if the task requires more load or room, we'll get an appropriate truck for the job. We use our pickups as a basic hauler that still offers the feel, ride, and comfort more akin to an auto, but able to do a heck of a lot more than an auto.
http://www.lancecunninghamford.com/new/Ford/2010-Ford-F-150-ed8b41830a0a0002000ee9207fd6bf9f.htm
It appears to me that Aussies use their trucks in their functional manner, meaning built to work out of. I think in the states, pickups are just an extension of cars the auto makers build. Hard to say when, but it's arguable that by the time the 1950's came around, US auto makers began putting a lot of emphasis into body style of autos with each new year model, each auto maker trying to make their cars with more eye appeal than their competition. That trend remains today with the auto makers. Pickups, on the other hand, were built for work back in the 30's right up to the late 50's. Then the auto makers started building pickups with body style like they did their cars. Chevy had the Fleetside, Ford had the Styleside. Yes, you could say this move took pickups away from their intended role...to work out of, and instead pickups were more about style and comfort. But we kinda embraced the improvements coming in pickups, to the point you'd be hard pressed to find even a basic pickup now that doesn't have air conditioning. But we still work out of them. Every day you see guys moving around with their work gear in the bed of the truck. Sure, if the task requires more load or room, we'll get an appropriate truck for the job. We use our pickups as a basic hauler that still offers the feel, ride, and comfort more akin to an auto, but able to do a heck of a lot more than an auto.
nowing75
Senior Member
No to metric. We should outlaw it hear in the states.
Jason
Jason
muzy
Well-Known Member
Hey, metric you will find very easy once you stop converting. It is actually a system. every measurment has a relationship. like one liter of water weighs one kg, Or how about water freezes at zero than....hang on boils at 100. Yup just a couple examples looks like it was thought out.
How many inches in a mile. Can figger that out.
centmeters in a kilometer. 100000, just like that no figering LOL muzy
Scrub Puller
Senior Member
Yair...thanks fellers. I'll have to have a think about all that.
Atco, that F series is a lot of truck for the money. Just guessing but I think you would be looking at plus sixty grand here...they have to do a conversion of course so they can drive on the right side of the road...which is the left side...if you get my drift.
Surprised at the tow rating though...2500kg, I thought it would have been more.
You nailed it muzy. The metric system is simpler but us old(ish) blokes still tend to think in PSI and feet and inches...old conventions die hard.
Atco, that F series is a lot of truck for the money. Just guessing but I think you would be looking at plus sixty grand here...they have to do a conversion of course so they can drive on the right side of the road...which is the left side...if you get my drift.
Surprised at the tow rating though...2500kg, I thought it would have been more.
You nailed it muzy. The metric system is simpler but us old(ish) blokes still tend to think in PSI and feet and inches...old conventions die hard.
You cannot get a diesel F150 in the states yet, so I would say priceless!
What make and size engine can you get down under and how many MPG?
willie59
Administrator
Actually Scrub Puller, the F150 is designed more for a comfort ride, more like an auto, but still be able to haul light loads that an auto won't do. Low tow rating is because of soft suspension and lighter weight components. You would want a 250, 350, or 450 if you want payload or towing capacity. The F450 gets you up around 24,400 lb (11,067 kg) tow rating if I'm reading the chart right.
Squizzy246B
Administrator
If I can add a little balance here:
We could probably, for the sake of learning something here, do without penis size discussions, and keep it objective.
Scrub Pullers discussions and points about US style pickups is a common theme of discussion in the down Under when talking about "utes" and small trucks...and realistically its fuel economy which dictates the Aussie markets.
However, for mind, the exact same type of argument can be levelled at the Aussie market. Our roads are full of dual cab 4 x 4's (utes) which are nothing more than status items. Builders (GC's) seem to buy a new one every year. It almost always is black with chrome wheels, tinted windows, chrome rollover bar and you can hardly fit a wheelbarrow in the back. They are "as flash as Michael Jackson" but about as useful for "real work" as a scrub rake on a tricycle. These vehicles will rarely go "off road" if at all and then its more likely to be on an annual holiday.
In most cases a 2 wheel drive tray back equivalent can be purchased for half the price, with twice the pay load and better economy/maintenance for a "Daily Driver". What also makes this rather ironic for the Aussie Market is these flash dual cab utes are around the $40 to $50k range and are incapable of carrying a tonne. For the same money you can be a plethora of solid Japanese trucks (even with factory tippers) in the 2-3 tonne range. A 12' bed is common on these handy trucks.
It all comes down to some people purchase for "needs" and some purchase for "wants"...and maybe some purchase because of the size of their..................bank balance!.
A good mate of mine is an electrician and had a Nissan Navara dual cab ute. The Turbo Diesel (the most powerful 4cyl diesel in its class at the time...so the advertising said) was difficult to live with, terrible turbo lag and the power came on all in rush then it ran out of puff in a second. He had racks for all his conduit and stuff and towed a dual axle trailer. The vehicle was a good compromise for him and it worked for a living. It went Monday to Friday on building sites, always fully loaded. On weekends his family where mad keen on off-roading so it was always dirty and getting used for its intended purpose.
He was an exception to the norm though and the Australian obsession with large "tough" 4 x 4's....that never go off-road (we call them Toorak Tractors), is probably no different to the American's Iconic "Trucks" with big V8's. You could argue that the Aussies do it a little more economically
I have owned 4 x 4's all my adult life but I currently have a 4 tonne Japanese truck for work and the missus has a Subaru wagon for the kids and holidays. It works for us. My next purchase will be about function and value.
We could probably, for the sake of learning something here, do without penis size discussions, and keep it objective.
Scrub Pullers discussions and points about US style pickups is a common theme of discussion in the down Under when talking about "utes" and small trucks...and realistically its fuel economy which dictates the Aussie markets.
However, for mind, the exact same type of argument can be levelled at the Aussie market. Our roads are full of dual cab 4 x 4's (utes) which are nothing more than status items. Builders (GC's) seem to buy a new one every year. It almost always is black with chrome wheels, tinted windows, chrome rollover bar and you can hardly fit a wheelbarrow in the back. They are "as flash as Michael Jackson" but about as useful for "real work" as a scrub rake on a tricycle. These vehicles will rarely go "off road" if at all and then its more likely to be on an annual holiday.
In most cases a 2 wheel drive tray back equivalent can be purchased for half the price, with twice the pay load and better economy/maintenance for a "Daily Driver". What also makes this rather ironic for the Aussie Market is these flash dual cab utes are around the $40 to $50k range and are incapable of carrying a tonne. For the same money you can be a plethora of solid Japanese trucks (even with factory tippers) in the 2-3 tonne range. A 12' bed is common on these handy trucks.
It all comes down to some people purchase for "needs" and some purchase for "wants"...and maybe some purchase because of the size of their..................bank balance!.
A good mate of mine is an electrician and had a Nissan Navara dual cab ute. The Turbo Diesel (the most powerful 4cyl diesel in its class at the time...so the advertising said) was difficult to live with, terrible turbo lag and the power came on all in rush then it ran out of puff in a second. He had racks for all his conduit and stuff and towed a dual axle trailer. The vehicle was a good compromise for him and it worked for a living. It went Monday to Friday on building sites, always fully loaded. On weekends his family where mad keen on off-roading so it was always dirty and getting used for its intended purpose.
He was an exception to the norm though and the Australian obsession with large "tough" 4 x 4's....that never go off-road (we call them Toorak Tractors), is probably no different to the American's Iconic "Trucks" with big V8's. You could argue that the Aussies do it a little more economically
I have owned 4 x 4's all my adult life but I currently have a 4 tonne Japanese truck for work and the missus has a Subaru wagon for the kids and holidays. It works for us. My next purchase will be about function and value.
ScottAR
Senior Member
Trick to value is to let someone else own it first. My base model f350 new was probably 20k+ new... 4years later, little over half that...
I do fancy those alum. flatbeds...
not giving up my 7.3 diesel though sorry...
I do fancy those alum. flatbeds...
not giving up my 7.3 diesel though sorry...
Squizzy246B
Administrator
Lol...I reckon if I could afford to run one I'd probably say the same thing.
mitch504
Senior Member
Squiz, I guess I was the first to use the "p-word" though two points in my defense: I was quoting another site's comment I found amusing; and our exalted founder said horsepower equated to testosterone levels first.
What I was talking about was the amazing amount of people I know who's pickup size is intimately connected to their self-esteem. I am frequently suprised by the things people tell me about their big pickups even though I'm not interested. One man actually asked if I really thought my 45,000 lb (20,454 kilos to stop that discussion) excavator would outpull a 4x4 f-250 diesel. Another man told me he knew the same machine would pull my loaded 4x2 C-30 service truck but if he got his empty 4x4 f-150 stuck we would have to get a diesel 4x4 f-350 to get it out.
I own 9 trucks from a '93 shortbed Toyota pickup to an '86 Toyota 1-Ton to a Chevy C-30 to a quad-axle Mack lowboy tractor, (the C-30 is a service truck, not a pickup). Each truck has something it is best for. There is not much that a pickup hauls that the Toyota 1-Ton won't and it has more bed space than a "full-size" shortbed. It carries 4000 lbs (1818 kilos) effortlessly and gets 27 mpg. If you are going to haul a big gooseneck trailer it is not what you want. Probably my favorite truck was an '82 Toyota 1-Ton 4x4 with a 7.5' service bed, back when Toyota sold real trucks in the US. The small truck makers don't even sell a longbed here anymore, and very few full-size models are sold with a bed longer than 6', even at 10,000 lb GVWR.
What I was talking about was the amazing amount of people I know who's pickup size is intimately connected to their self-esteem. I am frequently suprised by the things people tell me about their big pickups even though I'm not interested. One man actually asked if I really thought my 45,000 lb (20,454 kilos to stop that discussion
) excavator would outpull a 4x4 f-250 diesel. Another man told me he knew the same machine would pull my loaded 4x2 C-30 service truck but if he got his empty 4x4 f-150 stuck we would have to get a diesel 4x4 f-350 to get it out.I own 9 trucks from a '93 shortbed Toyota pickup to an '86 Toyota 1-Ton to a Chevy C-30 to a quad-axle Mack lowboy tractor, (the C-30 is a service truck, not a pickup). Each truck has something it is best for. There is not much that a pickup hauls that the Toyota 1-Ton won't and it has more bed space than a "full-size" shortbed. It carries 4000 lbs (1818 kilos) effortlessly and gets 27 mpg. If you are going to haul a big gooseneck trailer it is not what you want. Probably my favorite truck was an '82 Toyota 1-Ton 4x4 with a 7.5' service bed, back when Toyota sold real trucks in the US. The small truck makers don't even sell a longbed here anymore, and very few full-size models are sold with a bed longer than 6', even at 10,000 lb GVWR.
Last edited:
PSDF350
Senior Member
Squiz, I guess I was the first to use the "p-word" though two points in my defense: I was quoting another site's comment I found amusing; and our exalted founder said horsepower equated to testosterone levels first.
What I was talking about was the amazing amount of people I know who's pickup size is intimately connected to their self-esteem. I am frequently suprised by the things people tell me about their big pickups even though I'm not interested. One man actually asked if I really thought my 45,000 lb (20,454 kilos to stop that discussion
I own 9 trucks from a '93 shortbed Toyota pickup to an '86 Toyota 1-Ton to a Chevy C-30 to a quad-axle Mack lowboy tractor, (the C-30 is a service truck, not a pickup). Each truck has something it is best for. There is not much that a pickup hauls that the Toyota 1-Ton won't and it has more bed space than a "full-size" shortbed. It carries 4000 lbs (1818 kilos) effortlessly and gets 27 mpg. If you are going to haul a big gooseneck trailer it is not what you want. Probably my favorite truck was an '82 Toyota 1-Ton 4x4 with a 7.5' service bed, back when Toyota sold real trucks in the US. The small truck makers don't even sell a longbed here anymore, and very few full-size models are sold with a bed longer than 6', even at 10,000 lb GVWR.
Here's the differance too they (auto makers) don't sell a small truck that's a 1 ton. Toyota only recently came out with a 1 ton. Those small trucks you speak of are 1/4 tons here ie; ford ranger, chevy s10, nissan and so forth. The ford 150 is a half ton though there payloads have increased over the years now. Use to love them old 80's toyotas with the solid front axle, you couldn't kill them things. My only complant with them was there was no room in the cab, not to mention the body would rot out from under the motor that just wouldn't die.
Now as for metric my problem is say someone says were making this building 100 meters high, so your building it 328.8' high.:beatsme Where as a hundred yards is 300'. I think metric is fine if you are needing a tighter type spec. But I tend to think folks who use it, use it wrong. As in something is about 300' but will use 100 meters instead of 100 yards. I just think metric is more confusing because nothing is acually even. again using meter a meter is 3.2808 feet, where a yard is 3'. Or take a kilometer thats 1000 meters again confusing that would be 3280.8'. More than half a mile but less than 3/4. It's a pretty exact number, where as again a thousand yards is probably more like it. Like the lake is up the road about half a mile opposed to up the road a klik/kilometer. Sorry for the rant.
About the penis stuff and metric system
My apologies for any offence regarding the penis subject. In Australia our road safety department has used the small penis syndrome specifically in an National TV advertising program against car hoons. See YouTube - RTA 'PINKY' COMMERCIAL
And I have come across pickup owners over here who are definitely in the bigger is better camp even though they can't get a park and complain bitterly about the poor economy and unreliability.
And Squizzy is right too. There are too many four wheel drives in the cities and towns here whose main use is to muscle into the cramped carpark after school to pick up the kids.
And I can't let the metric issue go. Do you know there are only three, 3, countries in the world who do not use the metric system? The USA of course, the Burma dictatorship and Liberia, (where all those rustbucket, "flag of convenience", ships are registered.)
A friend of mine imports resins and windturbines from the USA amongst other places. It's the bane of his life getting products in quarts and machinery with imperial bolts etc. If he can get another similar product from elsewhere in the world he does, as they will be metric.
Seriously you folk in the USA are really missing out on export opportunities because you haven't fully got with the metric program on world trade. That may be one of the reasons why you have such a massive overseas debt.
Of course large companies like Caterpillar do produce products in metric as it does trade globally and is aware of this. However it does leave you in the USA having to deal with two systems of measurement instead of one like the rest of us:Banghead
Once again, no offence meant, after all this is a forum for opinion and like a bum, every one has one.
AusDave
My apologies for any offence regarding the penis subject. In Australia our road safety department has used the small penis syndrome specifically in an National TV advertising program against car hoons. See YouTube - RTA 'PINKY' COMMERCIAL
And I have come across pickup owners over here who are definitely in the bigger is better camp even though they can't get a park and complain bitterly about the poor economy and unreliability.
And Squizzy is right too. There are too many four wheel drives in the cities and towns here whose main use is to muscle into the cramped carpark after school to pick up the kids.
And I can't let the metric issue go. Do you know there are only three, 3, countries in the world who do not use the metric system? The USA of course, the Burma dictatorship and Liberia, (where all those rustbucket, "flag of convenience", ships are registered.)
A friend of mine imports resins and windturbines from the USA amongst other places. It's the bane of his life getting products in quarts and machinery with imperial bolts etc. If he can get another similar product from elsewhere in the world he does, as they will be metric.
Seriously you folk in the USA are really missing out on export opportunities because you haven't fully got with the metric program on world trade. That may be one of the reasons why you have such a massive overseas debt.
Of course large companies like Caterpillar do produce products in metric as it does trade globally and is aware of this. However it does leave you in the USA having to deal with two systems of measurement instead of one like the rest of us:Banghead
Once again, no offence meant, after all this is a forum for opinion and like a bum, every one has one.
AusDave
Squizzy246B
Administrator
G,day PSD, your point is well made about your market and I think there is parallels here. Some of the so-called legal payloads rated by the manufacturer's are just a plain joke. I think our Nissan Navara is a classic. It is rated to tow 3 tonnes or thereabouts but if look at it you could have a problem if you then put a carton of beer and your dog in the back (and Rover has put on a few kilos...err pounds.).
You might be just missing the point on the ole metric chestnut though. Metric was not designed to be easy to convert to an old system...it was designed to be logical. Even NASA comes unstuck when mixing the two:
http://edition.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric/
I still think in Miles Per Gallon though and having grown up on a farm I still can't relate to Hectares....even though mathematically it makes sense.
The point is the ISO standard is metric and nearly every country in the developed world changed to metric (if they already weren't) decades ago...so our kids don't have troubles converting metres to feet...they have no reason to.
You might be just missing the point on the ole metric chestnut though. Metric was not designed to be easy to convert to an old system...it was designed to be logical. Even NASA comes unstuck when mixing the two:
http://edition.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric/
I still think in Miles Per Gallon though and having grown up on a farm I still can't relate to Hectares....even though mathematically it makes sense.
The point is the ISO standard is metric and nearly every country in the developed world changed to metric (if they already weren't) decades ago...so our kids don't have troubles converting metres to feet...they have no reason to.
digger242j
Administrator
Is that a metric "3", or English?
willie59
Administrator
Well fiddle sticks, guess I'll say something about metric. :tong
Geez AusDave, kinda cold comparing us in the states to Burma and Liberia, albeit the truth. The truth hurts eh?
Nevertheless, why do we hold to an archaic system? Who knows for sure. I think one element is the sheer cost it would take to remove all reference of inches/miles/lbs in this large country if you stop and think about it. Just the cost of changing highway signs from New York to Los Angeles and all points across fruited plain would be staggering. As for me, being over 50, it would be hard to take me away from judging the approximate lenght of something in feet. Doesn't mean I reject the metric system either, heavens no, just old and set in my ways. Maybe it will change in time, but we Americans are a stubborn and independent sort, kinda been that way since we told the brits to go home in the late 1700's.
But I will add this in defense of the merits of the metric system; it did not, does not, will not require fractions, thereby making it much more freindly to the calculator, whether it's the electronic type, or the grey matter type connected to pencil and paper. :yup
Geez AusDave, kinda cold comparing us in the states to Burma and Liberia, albeit the truth. The truth hurts eh?
Nevertheless, why do we hold to an archaic system? Who knows for sure. I think one element is the sheer cost it would take to remove all reference of inches/miles/lbs in this large country if you stop and think about it. Just the cost of changing highway signs from New York to Los Angeles and all points across fruited plain would be staggering. As for me, being over 50, it would be hard to take me away from judging the approximate lenght of something in feet. Doesn't mean I reject the metric system either, heavens no, just old and set in my ways. Maybe it will change in time, but we Americans are a stubborn and independent sort, kinda been that way since we told the brits to go home in the late 1700's.
But I will add this in defense of the merits of the metric system; it did not, does not, will not require fractions, thereby making it much more freindly to the calculator, whether it's the electronic type, or the grey matter type connected to pencil and paper. :yup
Last edited:
Squizzy246B
Administrator
Guys there is no need to apologise for the penis measure....err.. references... Just wanted to make sure we kept relatively on track.I think the metric/imperial thing could go on forever too:beatsme
PSDF350
Senior Member
Yea believe me I get the metrc thing, it's just growing up with the standard system i hear meter and so forth and I start coverting to what makes sence to me. But like I said it is more acurate.
As for the penis jokes i'm over it. But I must say there is probably some merit to those statements because some men/boys buy them as a status symbol but then there alot of women that own and drive a full size truck. And we all know they have penis envy.:drinkup
As for the penis jokes i'm over it. But I must say there is probably some merit to those statements because some men/boys buy them as a status symbol but then there alot of women that own and drive a full size truck. And we all know they have penis envy.:drinkup
Copenhagen
Well-Known Member
I use my truck for work, play and family transportation. I have never seen a Toyota or any other Japanese pickup with loads like these.
I was over 24,000 lbs in each of these pictures.
As far as metric vs. standard, I wish the US would make up it's mind. I don't care one way or the other but I am sick and tired of needing two sets of tools to work on my truck.
I was over 24,000 lbs in each of these pictures.
As far as metric vs. standard, I wish the US would make up it's mind. I don't care one way or the other but I am sick and tired of needing two sets of tools to work on my truck.
Attachments
Last edited:
