Car Audio Central - Ultimate Car Audio Forum and Community

maybe I should be looking for a 2005 Harley Davidson F250 4x4 with the 6.0L Powerstroke. would be much better for pulling than that Lincoln LT...hmmm...maybe a blackwood and put some sweet audio in it too....hmmmm.

sinister audio wrote:inline 6 is alot better than the 5cy crap. straight 6's have been around forever and last for ever and they have some torque. that 5cy has the power of a 4 banger and the bad gas milage of the 6.

what experince do you have to base that off of? I havent driven the new I-5's yet so I do not know personally, but from what I read they have decent power. I'm guessing you drove one before, anything else you didnt like about it?

there is basically no room for a sub in my truck. time to get creative.

PLENTY of room for stereo's tho...that'll be easy if/when i replace the one in there now. its an in dash 6 cd changer. hard to beat for convenience.

Jszar wrote:there is basically no room for a sub in my truck. time to get creative.

PLENTY of room for stereo's tho...that'll be easy if/when i replace the one in there now. its an in dash 6 cd changer. hard to beat for convenience.

I think Q-Logic makes boxes for the newer Ford trucks. Might wanna check out Crutchfield for details. Then maybe you could improve on their design and save some money in the process.

My friend's dad thinks the 5 cylinder is much more capable in the Colorado versus the Trailblazer, FWIW.

I've only ridden in that trailblazer and engine strained a bit on the highway and was quite noisy. I don't know whether it is as crappy as my friend's dad said, but he isn't happy with it. It is a free ride for him, so I guess he can't complain too much

i know the owner of a local GM dealership and thats what he told me. so i pretty much got it from the horses mouth

really i dont know they might not have been similar packages... who knows its all subjective anyways. what you like is what you like doenst matter what someone else tells you... have you seen the new ss trailblazer? almost 400 ponies

his chevy was a little quicker in town but as far as towing, hauling, ground clearance was a huge difference, and off road capability my ford kicked his butt.....

there is basically no room for a sub in my truck. time to get creative

i built a glass box for a guy who has an f250 all we could get in there was a single 10 but i think your cab is a little different

"i love my dads silverado and they are the most dependable longest lasting trucks its been proven... its not just a statement..."

It's a study that dates back to 1981, Chevy used to base it upon a study dating to 1984, but the 80s where when Ford began sweeping the floor with Chevrolet. Recent quality studies have put Ford on top for years upon years, especially since the modular engine was introduced. As of now Chevys chassis is a limp noodle, the engines are lethargic, the interiors are cheap and the exterior is ugly. There is a reason they have to offer $9000 worth of rebates to move a truck off a parking lot.

I know a guy who has been a mechanic for Ford for decades and he told me Fords are built cheaply. (That's not to say Chevy's aren't.)

Maybe we need BMW to start making trucks?

Depends on which decade he's talking about. The 70s and 80s were the penny pinching days of American automakers, but that has changed drastically due to increasing competition from imports. F-150 costs more to make than the Silverado does, primarily because of the beefier chassis and the larger overall truck, also because of the interior design and materials. Decades ago, everything used to be built cheaply, from a Ford, Chevy, Toyota, Honda, whatever you want to put your finger on. They weren't exactly the eras you want to remember from any automakers, even companies like Porsche, BMW, Mercedes had crappy offerings in some form or another. Now it's finally coming back around.

The main problem with Chevy trucks is that their reliability isn't near what it used to be when you got a cast iron 350 and a TH-350 transmission. Ford has increased reliability to a point that even the tried and true 5.0L pales in comparision. The main reason the Chevy did roll back the study to 1981 is because their "most dependable, longest lasting truck" claim wouldn't have been true if they stuck with the 1984-2004 test data. Basically, they'll lose their claim very soon because they've been offering the same crappy trucks and SUVs since the late 1980s, with a few minor updates here and there, but minor is the key word. I guess it's a good strategy since you paid off the development costs over a decade ago, but the rest of the market got up and left GM a long time ago. I used to like GM, but I have lost a lot of faith in their capabilities, and I think vehicles like the Colorado are a good example of just how poorly GM percieves what a customer wants/needs. While others are making a smaller fullsize truck, GM gives you a larger compact. The Colorado/Canyon would have been acceptable when the Ranger and Nissan Hardbody were the only competitors, but those days are gone. So now, the Toyota Tacoma and Nissan Frontier have beefy 4.0L V6s, the Dodge Dakota has a 4.7L V8, and the new Ford Explorer Sport Trac (coming in early 06) will be the most powerful of all of them with the 300hp 4.6L V-8. And GM is the only one stuck with an I5 wheezer that combines the worst of the 4 cyl and 6 cyl, and for those that are wondering, it sucks. It lacks torque and it sucks as much gas as a V6, if not more. My company has one as a work truck and I've had the displeasure of having to drive one to Tennessee. It has to have the most uncomfortable seats I've ever planted my buttocks into, that didn't help, but the engine itself makes more noise than power. The 4.0L Ranger is more powerful, which I find sad since the Ranger platform was designed in the late 1970s and the 4.0L has been virtually the same since the early 1990s.