Truck shopping, what say ye APS?

[Balog]

http://seattle.craigslist.org/sno/cto/4155203887.html

1994 f250, high mileage but recently rebuilt and I believe the 351 small blocks have a good reputation? Don't see too many 5speed pickups anymore, and I like the extra cab and long bed combo. Any thoughts on this year/make/model?

[geronimotwo]

check if they had the 5-speed tranny straightened out by then.  i know there where some problems with the aluminum cased one used in the 6 cylinders for the late 80's early 90's.  it was outsourced to mazda i believe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_M5OD_transmission

it says here it was only used with the 300/6 and the 302/8, so you should be okay.  i would question why someone would put the time and effort to rebuild a vehicle, and then sell it?

[roo_ster]

My 1989 F150 4x4 w/ 302 has the 4sp Borg-Warner manual.  That year (1989) the 5sp manual is contraindicated.  Probably got it hammered out after 5 years.  Which is pretty tough.  I really like the way the Ford 4x4 pickups of this vintage handle, much better than the 2WD Fords (or 2WD Chevy).

Looking at the ad, if dude is truthful and it is otherwise in good shape, it is exactly what I am looking for in a sub-$3000 truck.  I would jump on it with both feet.  The only thing that could be better would be if it sported the 7.3L diesel.

The link above says nothing about the Mada 5sp in the F-250, but this posting does:
http://www.fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=69522
Also describes how to tell the diff between the Mazda & ZF 5sp trannys.

[Nick1911]

I own a 1995 F250 with the 351 windsor, automatic 2wd.

It's been an awesome truck.  245k+ on the clock, and it's getting pretty tired, but still starts up and has enough power to move cars on trailers around etc.

[Tallpine]

Makes me wonder why it has "has had almost everything rebuilt"   

We've got a GMC Suburban with 225K and the worst thing it has needed is a head gasket.  Otherwise, all repairs have been mostly maintenance items.

[Balog]

Truck in the OP didn't work out, still looking. http://seattle.craigslist.org/tac/cto/4233394829.html

Older F250 diesel. Thoughts?

[dogmush]

Truck in the OP didn't work out, still looking. http://seattle.craigslist.org/tac/cto/4233394829.html

Older F250 diesel. Thoughts?

Rode hard and put away wet.  Would not touch.

Maybe it's the mechanic in me, but I am suspicious of any used vehicle ad that doesn't have a picture of the engine.

[geronimotwo]

i would love that truck, but i would question the mileage.  anything with a fifth wheel says "long distance campers" to me.  drive it and see how loose it feels.

[Brad Johnson]

Truck in the OP didn't work out, still looking. http://seattle.craigslist.org/tac/cto/4233394829.html

Older F250 diesel. Thoughts?

That year would be the non-turbocharged 6.9L IDI diesel.  The engines are solid for a couple hundred thou, but only because they are so ridiculously under stressed (IIRC they are somewhere in the neighborhood if 170 hp and 300 lb-ft torque).  They aren't exactly praised for their towing ability.  The truck looks pretty rough otherwise.  I'd pass.

You might want to look into trucks down here on the high plains and maybe Arizona.  Dry climate and no salt to rot the tin work.  Might be able to find one worth the trip.

Brad

[geronimotwo]

did ya get it?

[Balog]

Decided against it. I'm torn as we need a second vehicle, I have limited cash to get one, and I could really use both a truck and a little commuter.

Re getting one from AZ etc: while it's probably worth it in the objective sense, I simply don't have the cash to afford a truck + plane ticket + gas to drive it back.

[roo_ster]

When you try to scrunch too many functions into one vehicle is when it starts getting expensive. 

If you actually need pickup functionality, don't worry about the commuter so much.  The hit you take in fuel costs will be attenuated a bit in the resale cost of the pickup, when you sell it.  You likely have figured out that even old beater pickups retain a surprising amount of market value.

Also, you are looking at the best possible commuter pickups, older diesels.  Friend of the family got into the horse-hauling business with a 1985 Chevy 3/4 ton with the 6.2L diesel, 4sp manual.  He slapped on the hi/lo 2-sp axle dealie and managed to get 24mpg unloaded.  Less hauling a 6 horse trailer of course.  Did that for 300k miles before trading.

[Tallpine]

I forget what your price range is, but there are a lot of 1990-something Chevy/GMC pickups out there.

Not too bad mileage with the small block v-8.

[charby]

Need the weigh the cost of the older vehicle and increased maintenance costs (potentially monthly), vs a newer vehicle and making monthly payments.

[Tallpine]

Need the weigh the cost of the older vehicle and increased maintenance costs (potentially monthly), vs a newer vehicle and making monthly payments.

Then there are higher licensing and insurance costs for a newer vehicle. 

[mtnbkr]

Then there are higher licensing and insurance costs for a newer vehicle.  

Not always.  My 4x4 cost me as much per year insurance-wise as my newer minivan and econobox.  The personal property taxes are less, but that is offset by the much lower fuel economy.  Cost to license it is the same for any of the three vehicles.

Chris

[drewtam]

You would have to use the truck functionality quite often (at least once a week) to hit break even on the extra cost. Very few people actually need a truck this often. The monthly Home Improvement Depot + yard sales (summer months only) + etc runs just aren't as common people think it is in their minds. The best financial path is cheap car paid in cash, and then rent a truck when its actually needed for that once a month use. This avoids the daily fuel, maintenance, repair, and depreciation costs.

As for a commuter car, the cost of gas is also often over estimated due to politics. $1000 of vehicle cost reduction can buy several years worth fuel compared to the MPG gains of something more expensive.

Of course, there are other reasons to buy a vehicle. If you love trucks, then buy it because you love the truck or you love the social status, but just don't kid yourself that it is a financial decision if you don't use the truck for business at least once a week.

[Tallpine]

Not always.  My 4x4 cost me as much per year insurance-wise as my newer minivan and econobox.  The personal property taxes are less, but that is offset by the much lower fuel economy.  Cost to license it is the same for any of the three vehicles.

Chris

You pay the same license fee for a 20 year old pickup as for a brand new car  

We have "permanent" plates for the three older ones, so we never pay another cent as long as we own the vehicle.  Available for anything older than ten years in MT.

And we just carry liability insurance on all but one.

[Tallpine]

You would have to use the truck functionality quite often (at least once a week) to hit break even on the extra cost. Very few people actually need a truck this often. The monthly Home Improvement Depot + yard sales (summer months only) + etc runs just aren't as common people think it is in their minds. The best financial path is cheap car paid in cash, and then rent a truck when its actually needed for that once a month use. This avoids the daily fuel, maintenance, repair, and depreciation costs.

As for a commuter car, the cost of gas is also often over estimated due to politics. $1000 of vehicle cost reduction can buy several years worth fuel compared to the MPG gains of something more expensive.

Of course, there are other reasons to buy a vehicle. If you love trucks, then buy it because you love the truck or you love the social status, but just don't kid yourself that it is a financial decision if you don't use the truck for business at least once a week.

If you need some kind of backup vehicle then it might as well be a pickup and 4wd.

[41magsnub]

You pay the same license fee for a 20 year old pickup as for a brand new car  

We have "permanent" plates for the three older ones, so we never pay another cent as long as we own the vehicle.  Available for anything older than ten years in MT.

And we just carry liability insurance on all but one.

I do love my permanent tags on the older rigs.

[mtnbkr]

You pay the same license fee for a 20 year old pickup as for a brand new car 

We have "permanent" plates for the three older ones, so we never pay another cent as long as we own the vehicle.  Available for anything older than ten years in MT.

And we just carry liability insurance on all but one.

Yes, if by "license fee" you mean the plate fees I pay to the DMV every year.  The variation in my yearly cost is the "Personal Property Tax" levied against the vehicles I own.  That is not a "license fee", but a tax I pay to my local municipal govt.  Insurance is about the same for all three vehicles (varies by less than $50 per year per vehicle).

Chris

[Tallpine]

Yes, if by "license fee" you mean the plate fees I pay to the DMV every year.  The variation in my yearly cost is the "Personal Property Tax" levied against the vehicles I own.  That is not a "license fee", but a tax I pay to my local municipal govt.  Insurance is about the same for all three vehicles (varies by less than $50 per year per vehicle).

Chris

You have to pay tax over and above what is included in the license plate fee   

I dunno what are the models/ages of your vehicles, but liability on a 20 year old pickup should be vastly cheaper than full coverage on a new minivan, or anything.

[Nick1911]

You have to pay tax over and above what is included in the license plate fee   

Missouri plays that game too.  The plate is one fee, but there is a separate "personal property" tax, paid to a separate office which must be paid.

Nothing like having to pay a tax for the privilege of continuing to own your own personal property. 

Fortunately it's paid in arrears, and I only lived in MO for one year. 

[mtnbkr]

You have to pay tax over and above what is included in the license plate fee   

I dunno what are the models/ages of your vehicles, but liability on a 20 year old pickup should be vastly cheaper than full coverage on a new minivan, or anything.

4x4s have high insurance rates in most places.  Yes, liability-only is lower than full coverage, but when I was driving my 4x4 daily, I maintained full coverage as the difference was not that much (about $100/year).  With full coverage, it was roughly the same cost as my 2007 van and 2013 car.  Now that the 4x4 is only used for hunting and camping, I have it rated as a "pleasure vehicle" or some such and pay about $150/year.  However, I only drive it a few hundred miles a year now.

I don't go the "liability only" route for a daily driver as it is seldom cheap enough to offset the cost of even one accident.  Hell, the delta wouldn't even cover a windshield repair ($100 out of pocket deductible with my insurance plan). 

Chris

[Tallpine]

Well, it's a lot different here in MT.

When we first got the then 2 year old car, it seems like the insurance was something like $500/yr for full coverage just for it, while the pickup/suburban were a little over $100/yr each   

I know it something like tripled our insurance expense just for the new car.  The plates were about $300/yr also.  At any rate I questioned the gas savings, unless we make multiple out of state trips every year.

I can't imagine going down and renting a pickup just to go to the hardware/building store.  There is something to be said for the convenience of having something to use on the spur of the moment whenever you want.  But most town people don't really need a pickup, as they can always borrow one from a neighbor