4x4 truck hunting again

[S.A. Boggs]

Our daughter's Jeep Grand Cherokee just left the garage and our mechanic said to find a replacement. Went our looking today and got STICKER SHOCK!!! New one's price is outstanding and very little in used. Samantha wants a PU and I could not find anything that would not cost and arm and a leg. Going to continue to look at other 4x4 other then PU. Any suggestions short of robbing a bank?
Sam

[jon_norstog]

I kind of like the 02-07 Subaru Forester. I'm thinking of selling my Sportage and getting one. It's got a real AT, not a CVT. That generation of Forester is fairly light, has a good roofline and plenty of glass. It is a pretty decent hunting rig and has a good reliability record. Look for one that was woman-owned and dealer-maintained. I prefer a manual shift but all th Jap and Korean 4 bys have tiny, car-size clutches. I smoked the one on my Sportage w/o half trying. I go for the AT anymore.

Or look for one of these.


Good luck!

jnportland_jeep (2).jpg

[togor]

Chevy Colorado is a mid sized PU, available used. If my 20 year old Dakota gives up to the ghost then that's where I'd look for my next firewood truck. I don't buy Fords and have grown accustomed to GM quirks. And they're cheaper on maintenance than the Jap trucks.

The new Wrangler PUs are interesting but spendy. But other Jeeps are priced accessibly.

[S.A. Boggs]

My clinic bought fleet maintained used vehicles for us to use, I was issued a 2008 Ford Taurus. I was never a Ford person having owned many Jeep's or Chrysler vehicles. I refuse to buy GM because of the moronic "daylight running lights" that they have. If one does not have enough intelligence to know when to turn the lights on, should they be driving? I recently purchased a Ford F150 Super Cab 4x4 with a construction topper and the vehicle is outstanding. Except for the blown plug I have had no problems with it at all. My new mechanic appears to be on the ball and has serviced our fleet of vehicles for our Church for 15 years. He is quick and reasonable as well. Keep the suggestions coming and nice picture Jon.
I showed my daughter a picture of an Army surplus 6x6 to see what she would say. Her only comment was, "Is diesel cheaper?"
Sam

[lyman]

Toyota makes a good pickup, my 2000 Tundra is still going strong,

however they are pricey, and resale (ditto subaru) is very good, for the seller,


my brother has had nothing but Ford's with out any issues, and I know folks that have Chevy's w/o major issues either,

[Sunray]

"...would not cost and arm and a leg..." Any of 'em that are brand new will cost that. Saw a girlie(no more standard transmissions in Fords) BNIB, 4 door, 4X4, F-150, several years ago that had a price sticker on it of 70 grand Cdn, before taxes and the rest of the government cash grabs.
"..."Is diesel cheaper?"..." The fuel might be(it isn't always up here), but the vehicles are not. The diesel engine option can run 4 grand to 11 grand. And they cost more to maintain.

[togor]

Daytime running lights on GM are not an issue. In my view if it helps keep a distracted driver from crossing to my side of the centerline then it's all good. My WK2 also has them, no complaints.

[jon_norstog]

Toyota makes a good pickup, my 2000 Tundra is still going strong,

however they are pricey, and resale (ditto subaru) is very good, for the seller,


...

I like the smaller Toyota the one they call Tacoma now. Even it is too big anymore. My brother and nephew both have older, righ-size ones and they have been handy in the woods plus reliable (except, again for the puny, small-car-size clutch.)

jn

[lyman]

I like the smaller Toyota the one they call Tacoma now. Even it is too big anymore. My brother and nephew both have older, righ-size ones and they have been handy in the woods plus reliable (except, again for the puny, small-car-size clutch.)

jn

good friend has a 14 taco,
it is about the same size as my Tundra, (2000),
I have just a bit more room inside than he does, and maybe few inches wider,


the new tundra's, Chevy's Fords etc are way to big in my opinion,

I see some of the offerings in other countries and wonder what it would take to get one here, and be able to drive it on the highway,,

[Carbine64]

I just picked up a off lease f150 4x4 for 28000 .Very low miles and with the way things are going the deals might be better.

[S.A. Boggs]

That was my thinking as well
Sam

[Art]

The Following is based on our experience only

We bought a 2007 Forester band new. The other vehicles we looked at were the Toyota Rav 4, Honda CR-V, and Jeep Liberty (no longer in production.) Because of my outdoor activities AWD or 4WD were a must. I got tired of worrying whether I'd get myself into something I'd not be able to get out of in a 2wd station wagon.

One disclaimer, no AWD Crossover SUV will have the off road capability of a 4WD full size pick up truck.

Long story short, the Forester won the competition. It was no more expensive than any of the others and AWD which was at least a $1,000.00 add on with everybody else, was/is standard. It had comparable fuel economy, more ground clearance than any of them except the now defunct Liberty (ground clearance.) It did not quite have the angle of attack or off road capability of a vehicle like a 4WD 4 Runner but cost a heck of a lot less.

We fell in love with the thing. Slick road qualities were exemplary - it was almost impossible to make the vehicle slip or "fish tail" when acellerating on a wet road and stopping distance was a lot shorter than 2wd vehicles, especially on a slick road. Due to the flat 4 engine it had a very low center of gravity which made it much handier than the competition, in fact the near sport car manuverablily saved our bacon more than once. Fuel economy was comparable to the 2 wd Rav 4 and Cr-V.

The full wheel drive in line system which Subaru calls Symetrical All Wheel Drive is not subject to "torque walking" which plagues AWD systems with transverse mounted engines. Out of pocket maintenance costs on the 2007 which we turned over a year ago were, replace battery twice: replace alternator once; replace all four wheel bearings; two front wheel and one rear wheel brake jobs; replace struts once; replace A/C seals and refill coolant; Four sets of tires - and the most maddening one - replace fuel filler tube which should have been a recall item due to defective valve design. All of those except the last come under expected maintenance. We got rid of the car at 12 years and 130,000 miles. The relatively low mileage was due to my wife needing a full time high mileage work car about 6 years into the 2007 Subaru's life. She got a Honda Civic which ws the high mileage king of non "electro" compacts, at that point the Subaru was used mostly for outdoor activities, some longer trips and hauling bulky loads like building supplies and such. She retired last may so we're a one car family again.

We bought a new 2019 last year. It does have a CVR transmission. We've only had it a year but so far we are ok with it. Compared to the 2007 model we had the interior is cavernous. Gas mileage with the 2007 was (by actual measurement) 20-23 mpg in town, 23-26 mpg combined, and 26-29 on the highway. The new one comes in at 23-26 mpg in town, 26-28 combined and 31-35 on the highway.

On the road it is very well mannered. Off road - I haven't done the Pikes Peak Hill Climb or anything like that but I've put it through some quite rough ranch roads and pretty rough and/or wet off roads spots with no problem. It would be even more competent with more aggressive tires. Ground clearance is the top of its class at 8.7" If you get into a situation where serious off roading is required the manufacturer recommend turning off the traction control which is counter intuitive but I've heard from other sources takes up off road capability a half step.

Our new one is a base model with the following dealer added "perks:" cast aluminum wheels, luggage rack rails, cargo area floor protector, passenger compartment Subaru rubber fitted floor mats. Drive out price after some negotiations was right at $26,000.00. Subaru is the "Barbie Doll" off vehicles when it comes to dealer available add ons, they actually have a catalogue full of that stuff. This which can be dangerous where my wife is concerned, and in some ways me too. We added aerodynamic luggage rack cross bars ($200.00,) cargo net ($50.00,) rear seat protectors ($75.00,) and, this one was on me, steel engine under guard ($225.00) which had a label on it saying "Subaru Russian Federation" which I guess will tell you where that accessory is used most of the time.

We didn't do much checking out of the Jeep Liberty because the dealership were a bunch of "butts" but I still see a lot of them on the road and the come with a 4WD option and have a very good angle of attack so if you can find a good one of those that's been babied and you want more serious off road capability you might check them out. I guarantee it will probably cost less than a similarly babied Forrester.

Sorry if it sounds like a commercial but you can, of course check all of this out yourselves.

The thing I always worry about with vintage technology, meaning any vehicle over 20 years old, is reliability. No matter how well maintained it is it is more likely to let you down. If it lets you down it may be at the wrong time, maybe the "wrong, wrong" time.

Again, just my devalued $.05 worth and, as indicated above, your mileage may vary.

[High Plaines Doug r]

I just read an article by a guy who interviewed the oil patch workers between Fairbanks and Prudhoe Bay about their preferences in mostly company supplied trucks (mainly diesel). The votes were mostly for Ford and GMC/Chevy. They thought Chrysler had cheap, plastic interiors that would crack in the arctic cold and that the vehicle in general, other than the engine, was unreliable. The GMC/Chevy got the most votes for comfort but the front end alignment was fragile, needing constant adjustment. The interior heater was the BEST and where the crews would camp out during down time. The Ford was the most rugged and was chosen when a job needed to get done but the interior heater was wimpy and everyone whined about it.
Probably not helpful for you Texans or Floridians but a baseline.

[lyman]

I just read an article by a guy who interviewed the oil patch workers between Fairbanks and Prudhoe Bay about their preferences in mostly company supplied trucks (mainly diesel). The votes were mostly for Ford and GMC/Chevy. They thought Chrysler had cheap, plastic interiors that would crack in the arctic cold and that the vehicle in general, other than the engine, was unreliable. The GMC/Chevy got the most votes for comfort but the front end alignment was fragile, needing constant adjustment. The interior heater was the BEST and where the crews would camp out during down time. The Ford was the most rugged and was chosen when a job needed to get done but the interior heater was wimpy and everyone whined about it.
Probably not helpful for you Texans or Floridians but a baseline.

I have heard and read similar about the Dodge,

most seem to believe the Cummins engine is good for about double the life of the actual truck

[S.A. Boggs]

I just read an article by a guy who interviewed the oil patch workers between Fairbanks and Prudhoe Bay about their preferences in mostly company supplied trucks (mainly diesel). The votes were mostly for Ford and GMC/Chevy. They thought Chrysler had cheap, plastic interiors that would crack in the arctic cold and that the vehicle in general, other than the engine, was unreliable. The GMC/Chevy got the most votes for comfort but the front end alignment was fragile, needing constant adjustment. The interior heater was the BEST and where the crews would camp out during down time. The Ford was the most rugged and was chosen when a job needed to get done but the interior heater was wimpy and everyone whined about it.
Probably not helpful for you Texans or Floridians but a baseline.

One of the best things I like about my F-150 is the heater as it gets warm.
Sam