FYI: Ford just released monthly sales figures for the month of May, and while analysts were expecting a small drop (-1.9%) in sales, the company actually managed to post a modest gain (0.7%). In addition to the better than expected headline reading, Ford also posted strong sales of F-Series trucks. Not only are sales of F-series trucks important for Ford (higher margin), but they are also a good economic barometer. The reason? Trucks are often purchased by small businesses and contractors, so they provide a good read on the health of the small business sector. Based on these sales totals, small businesses continue to do well, which is a good sign for the economy. Overall in May, Ford sold 84,369 F-Series trucks, which is the second best reading for the month of May since 1996! The only year where Ford sold more F-Series trucks in the month of May was 2000 when total sales were 85,506.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bespokepremium.com/think-big-blog/ford-truck-sales-inching-closer-to-a-record-pace/
Comments
Don’t know if they still build them like that. That engine isn’t built anymore - and I’ve heard the new smaller engines are pretty awful (for durability) from all the U.S. makers.
Cost? - About $11,000 brand new, off the showroom floor, out the door, April 1990.
The Ford marketing is all about better efficiency w/ more power, but my concern, as you mention, is longevity/durability. Planning to look at the Consumer Reports reliability ratings to see if there's anything concrete in those reports about that engine. Any particulars you've heard about it?
Thx -- AJ
@AndyJ, - No - nothing definitive. While having tire work done at a local independent garage a few months ago I got an “earful” from 2 or 3 of the mechanics grousing loudly about the newer U.S. engines. They work on many brands and think the foreign engines like Honda, Toyota, Volvo are much better built. The discussion wasn’t related to trucks - more to autos as I understood it. Now - take it for what it’s worth (probably not much). They used words like “junk” “trash” and “garbage” in describing the newer U.S. engines they’ve worked on lately.
All I can say is these guys have been in business a long time. Most of my service is done either at Ford or GM dealerships - so I found the discussion from these fellas who work on all brands enlightening - but wouldn’t make a decision based on that alone. But here’s a thought: Try “rubbing elbows” with some independent service people who work on all the different brands. You might get a more honest appraisal of best/worst engines from them than from a dealership. I don’t trust Edmonds and the rest because I think they’re basically rating vehicles right off the assembly line - not ones that have been on the road 2 or 3 years.
With an older Chev pickup (V8) and Ford auto (V6) I don’t have any personal insights on the new engines. The ones I have use older technology. No complaints. I did look online at the Toyota Tacoma smaller pickups a while back, and were I in the market for a smaller truck I think that’s what I’d buy. (And they are built in the U.S.)
Added: I’ve owned lots of 4 cylinder engines (70s and 80s) and found them to be very durable and long lasting. So the issue isn’t 4-bangers in particular - just some of the latest versions.
Little experience with smaller trucks. Bought a Chev. S-10 when they debuted in the early 80s and traded it in 6 months later on a full sized Ford. Just hauled some 10’ sections of split rail fencing home today and they were sticking up over the tailgate of the 8’ box. Would have been even more challenging with a 5 or 6 foot box as many now have.
Agree that new Ford Ranger looks cool. And Ford has a history of producing good trucks.
One of the most important things in a truck is ground clearance. Nice on rough terrain, unimproved trails and in deep snow. Even with 4WD ground clearance is important. That’s what impressed me about the Tacomas when I looked at them.
@Hank- Based on my extensive personal experience with an S-10 that was probably one of the smartest things you ever did. Although mine was an early 2000s model... if they were a good truck earlier they sure didn't improve over time.
That was ‘82, the first year for the S-10 and marked the entry of U.S. makers into that segment. Bought it in May. Traded it in on a new ‘82 F100 in November. No change in model year. Went from an automatic trans to manual on the Ford. The S-10 was still in high demand at the time - so the cash needed to close was minuscule.
That’s the fastest I ever walked / drove away from a dealership. Kept looking back - expecting they’d change their mind at the last minute.
My old-time, self employed Toyota mechanic advised me to keep the '87 running as long as possible, because the new ones aren't as reliable or as fuel efficient. Consumer Reports (a pretty neutral organization, I think) seemed to back him up on that; everything into the 'naughties had the highest marks for reliability and durability, and then the ratings started slipping.
I'll for sure do more snooping and reading before I plunk down the cash for a new Ranger.
Thanks again -- AJ
P.S. That 2.3L being in the 150 was a sales guy's info, and I was a bit skeptical about it too. And yeah, clearance is at the top of the concerns for the part of the country where I live. Don't see too many Priuses on dirt backroads in the mountains.
Me too. Consumer Reports isn't too thrilled about the Tacoma, although in fairness they never really have been. I really like our 2009 V6 Tacoma- it's been completely trouble-free up till now. One thing I absolutely DONT want- a new pickup with "automatic everything" controlled by a video screen.
I rarely have to tow anything, but still am happy if what I buy has the trailer towing package (like my current Chev.) Reason? you get a beefier more forgiving suspension just in case you happen to overload it sometimes (I do.) And, often that option also gives you a tougher transmission as well. Warning: The towing package will give you a harsher ride due to stiffer suspension. And in a smaller truck that’s a significant negative.
Engine options? Suppose I could be convinced that a 4 cylinder would meet my needs. But, would ruther have a 6 or an 8 - knowing how I use (and sometimes abuse) a truck.
@OldJoe - The reviews always seem to favor the new-fangled stuff.
@Maurice earlier mentioned a 4-cylinder F150. If one ever existed, I’d sure like a link to it.
Yes - The 300 cu engine was for serious trucking. It was never a hot-dog. Truck enthusiasts, however, raved about the amount of torque the engine developed, even at relatively low RPMs. That ‘90 I liked had fuel injection. And, with a 5-speed manual, I thought it moved pretty good. No doubt it would have been a bit of a dog with an automatic. The fuel injected 300 cubic inch (4.9 liter) truck engine was rated at 150 HP. For comparison, Ford’s latest Mustang equipped with a 2.3 liter turbo 4-cylinder engine develops 310 HP. However, I’d like to see somebody try pulling a stump out of the ground with the Mustang.
Article: Why the Ford 300 in-line six is one of the greatest engines ever
https://jalopnik.com/heres-why-the-ford-300-inline-six-is-one-of-the-greates-1795351528
-
Edit: @Maurice - If the salesperson told you Ford didn’t offer a V-8 F150 back than he or she was lying. Ford had them - but they were usually in short supply. So it was much more common to find trucks equipped with the straight-6 on dealer lots.
Keep on trucking, Derf