Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: DSTOTY '09: Pickups
Dieselstation Car Forums > Parking Lot > Compare & Contrast
clarkma5
For more on the DieselStation Car of the Year '09 competition, please see this thread.

Chevrolet Silverado/GMC Sierra Two-Mode Hybrid
Base MSRP:
$38,020 (Silverado), $38,390 (Sierra)
Available Engines: 6.0 liter OHV 16-valve V8 with multiple displacement system and parallel hybrid-drive system and 332 HP and 367 ft.-lbs. of torque
Available Transmissions: 4-speed automatic transmission
Available Drivetrains: Rear wheel drive or part-time 4-wheel drive w/ low-range gearing and auto mode
EPA Fuel Economy: 21 City/22 Highway (RWD), 20/20 (4WD)
Curb Weight: 5341-5882 lbs.







Dodge Ram 1500
Base MSRP:
$21,270 (Reg. Cab V6 RWD), $29,475 (Ext. Cab 4.7 V8 4WD SLT), $43,240 (Crew Cab 5.7 V8 4WD Laramie)
Available Engines: 3.7 liter SOHC 12-valve V6 with 210 HP and 235 ft.-lbs. of torque, 4.7 liter SOHC 16-valve V8 with 310 HP and 330 ft.-lbs. of torque, 5.7 liter OHV 16-valve V8 with multiple displacement system and 390 HP and 410 ft.-lbs. of torque
Available Transmissions: 4-speed automatic (V6 only) or 5-speed automatic transmission with manual shift capabilities (N/A on V6)
Available Drivetrains: Rear wheel drive or part-time 4-wheel drive with low-range gearing (N/A on V6)
EPA Fuel Economy: 14 City/20 Highway (V6 & 5.7 RWD), 14/19 (4.7 RWD), 13/18 (4.7 & 5.7 4WD)
Curb Weight: 4517-5542 lbs.







Ford F-150
Base MSRP:
$21,565 (Reg. Cab 4.6 16v RWD), $32,100 (Ext. Cab 4.6 24v 4WD), $44,355 (Crew Cab 5.4 4WD Platinum)
Available Engines: 4.6 liter SOHC 16-valve V8 with 248 HP and 294 ft.-lbs. of torque, 4.6 liter SOHC 24-valve V8 with 292 HP and 320 ft.-lbs. of torque, 5.4 liter SOHC 24-valve V8 with 310 HP and 365 ft.-lbs. of torque (320/390 on E-85)
Available Transmissions: 4-speed automatic (4.6 16v only) or 6-speed automatic transmission (N/A on 4.6 16v)
Available Drivetrains: Rear wheel drive or part-time 4-wheel drive with low-range gearing
EPA Fuel Economy: 15 City/21 Highway (RWD 4.6 24v w/ SFE Package), 15/20 (RWD 4.6 24v), 14/20 (5.4 RWD), 14/19 (4.6 16v RWD & 4.6 24v 4WD), 14/18 (4.6 16v 4WD & 5.4 4WD), 10/14 (5.4 RWD on E-85), 10/13 (5.4 4WD on E-85)
Curb Weight: 4743-5683 lbs.







Hummer H3T
Base MSRP:
$30,750 (I5), $36,015 (V8)
Available Engines: 3.7 liter DOHC 20-valve inline-5 with 239 HP and 241 ft.-lbs. of torque, 5.3 liter OHV 16-valve V8 with 300 HP and 320 ft.-lbs. of torque
Available Transmissions: 5-speed manual (I5 only) or 4-speed automatic transmission
Available Drivetrains: Full-time 4-wheel drive with low-range gearing
EPA Fuel Economy: 14 City/18 Highway (I5 5MT & 4AT), 13/16 (V8)
Curb Weight: 4911-5069 lbs.







Suzuki Equator
Base MSRP:
$17,220 (Ext. Cab I4 RWD), $23,210 (Crew Cab V6 RWD)
Available Engines: 2.5 liter DOHC 16-valve inline-4 with 152 HP and 171 ft.-lbs. of torque, 4.0 liter DOHC 24-valve V6 with 261 HP and 281 ft.-lbs. of torque
Available Transmissions: 5-speed manual (I4 only) or 5-speed automatic transmission
Available Drivetrains: Rear wheel drive or 4-wheel drive with low-range gearing (V6 only)
EPA Fuel Economy: 19 City/23 Highway (I4 5MT), 17/22 (I4 5AT), 15/20 (V6 RWD), 15/19 (V6 4WD)
Curb Weight: 3686-4581 lbs.





moe
Ford, basically because it had the nicest interior/exterior combo, and I've heard they're quite useful.
Halflifehavock13
I went with the ford. However, I dont know about everyone else, but I'm not a fan of the exterior. IMO the last generation was one of the best looking f150's made and this gen doesn't tickle my fancy. Still, it wasn't enough to put me off.
fiber optic
Ford F-series has always been and will continue to be my favorite truck.
Benny
*see above
DB9
I've heard nothing but good things about the Dodge. The interior looks fantastic and, minus a little chrome, the exterior would be quite nice as well! Plus, they've got some really nifty compartments on the side of the truck bed.
clarkma5
I went for the Dodge...the fact that it's got a proper coil spring rear suspension is a breath of fresh air in trucks, and I think it's the best looking one here, plus the Hemi whoops the Ford 5.4's ass.
Benny
i wasn't aware of that new rear suspension clark.
can you change my vote to dodge....
fiber optic
QUOTE(Benny @ Feb 24 2009, 08:20 PM) *
i wasn't aware of that new rear suspension clark.
can you change my vote to dodge....


That's seriously all it takes to change your mind?
Mitlov
Valuing carlike ride-quality over truck utility...isn't that the same thing that everyone flamed Honda for with the unibody, independent-rear-suspensioned Ridgeline? And while Dodge says it has no worries about the durability of the coil spring design (would they ever say otherwise?), one can't help but notice that Dodge chose leaf springs over coil springs for the heavy-duty Ram models.

Also, I can't help but think that those storage bins in the truck are a gimmick. It's just like a toolbox, except you can never remove it and it leaves you with a very narrow bed. Thanks but no thanks.

So due to the above, as well as Ford's more pleasing interior design, classier and more subtle exterior, recent superb reliability ratings (this is a truck, after all, so reliability matters), and superior fuel economy, I vote for the F-150.
clarkma5
QUOTE(Benny @ Feb 24 2009, 06:20 PM) *
i wasn't aware of that new rear suspension clark.
can you change my vote to dodge....


done
Benny
QUOTE(fiber optic @ Feb 24 2009, 06:29 PM) *
That's seriously all it takes to change your mind?


id still rather have a F-350 superduty rolleyes.gif
clarkma5
QUOTE(Mitlov @ Feb 24 2009, 06:42 PM) *
And while Dodge says it has no worries about the durability of the coil spring design (would they ever say otherwise?), one can't help but notice that Dodge chose leaf springs over coil springs for the heavy-duty Ram models.

Also, I can't help but think that those storage bins in the truck are a gimmick. It's just like a toolbox, except you can never remove it and it leaves you with a very narrow bed. Thanks but no thanks.


1) Look at the payloads and tow ratings comparing the half-ton to the superduty trucks...there's your answer. I have no doubt that coil springs are totally adequate for half-ton duty, and to claim otherwise is really baseless. Dodge did their homework and subjected these trucks to all sorts of testing, developed their payload ratings, and have put them on the market with a full warranty. I know sometimes even with all that things can go wrong, but they've got more on their side than your "oh can we really trust them?" malarkey.

2) The toolboxes are only on crew cab models. Regular and extended cab trucks don't have them.
Mitlov
QUOTE(clarkma5 @ Feb 24 2009, 10:40 PM) *
1) Look at the payloads and tow ratings comparing the half-ton to the superduty trucks...there's your answer. I have no doubt that coil springs are totally adequate for half-ton duty, and to claim otherwise is really baseless. Dodge did their homework and subjected these trucks to all sorts of testing, developed their payload ratings, and have put them on the market with a full warranty. I know sometimes even with all that things can go wrong, but they've got more on their side than your "oh can we really trust them?" malarkey.


I guess I missed the point where we started trusting Chrysler to get everything right. And it's not just "my" malarkey, for the reason, it's actually Automotive News's malarkey that I just happen to agree with.

And obviously a three-quarter-ton truck has a larger payload and towing capacity than a half-ton. That's not my point. My point is if there wasn't a downside to coil springs, you'd expect that they'd put coil springs on all their trucks (just heavier-duty coil springs on the heavier-duty trucks) instead of using leaf springs for everything but the half-ton.

QUOTE
2) The toolboxes are only on crew cab models. Regular and extended cab trucks don't have them.


Doesn't make them any less of a gimmick in my book.
clarkma5
...but it's a gimmick you don't need to have if you don't want it, unless a crew cab is a must-have for you, then by all means get another truck. Just trying to educate and inform here.

As for the "put heavier duty coil springs on their superduty trucks", maybe they put springs that were as heavy-duty as they wanted to put on the half-ton model and didn't want to uprate them even further for the superduty application, since "heavier duty" springs will have a higher sprint rate. Since the superduty trucks don't weigh significantly more than the half-ton trucks, but require significantly higher payloads, perhaps Chrysler engineers determined that the payload carrying ability vs. everyday ride quality tradeoff didn't make sense for a coil spring application on their heavy-duty trucks...or, perhaps even more likely, Chrysler decided that superduty buyers place a lower priority on ride comfort and chose to go with leaf springs for cost savings and perhaps some packaging benefits. There's a million-and-one logical explanations before you get to "coil springs are obviously bad and Dodge was stupid for putting them on the half-ton models".
MustangAficionado
I don't like the new F-150, it looks too much like a big F-250. And the interior looks like a space shuttle from the 60's. And I own a mustang...
Mitlov
QUOTE(clarkma5 @ Feb 24 2009, 11:04 PM) *
...but it's a gimmick you don't need to have if you don't want it, unless a crew cab is a must-have for you, then by all means get another truck. Just trying to educate and inform here.

As for the "put heavier duty coil springs on their superduty trucks", maybe they put springs that were as heavy-duty as they wanted to put on the half-ton model and didn't want to uprate them even further for the superduty application, since "heavier duty" springs will have a higher sprint rate. Since the superduty trucks don't weigh significantly more than the half-ton trucks, but require significantly higher payloads, perhaps Chrysler engineers determined that the payload carrying ability vs. everyday ride quality tradeoff didn't make sense for a coil spring application on their heavy-duty trucks...or, perhaps even more likely, Chrysler decided that superduty buyers place a lower priority on ride comfort and chose to go with leaf springs for cost savings and perhaps some packaging benefits. There's a million-and-one logical explanations before you get to "coil springs are obviously bad and Dodge was stupid for putting them on the half-ton models".


And the fact that the engineers at Ford and GM and Toyota and Nissan have chosen to stick with leaf springs for their half-tons doesn't give you any cause for concern? There's two possibilities right now. First, the engineers at those four companies are sitting pretty saying "we really don't think this is a good idea, but best of luck to you Chrysler boys." Second, the Chrysler engineers are brilliant, whereas the engineers at those four companies are kicking themselves saying "shit, there's huge handling gains to be had with coil springs in a half-ton, and better yet, no real downside! Even though we've abandoned leaf springs in most other vehicles long ago, the possibility of using coil springs in half-tons just never occurred to us! We're all idiots compared to those Chrysler boys!"

Given my feelings about Chrysler as a whole (worst auto company in North America right now), I think a healthy dose of skepticism is worthwhile when they do X and Ford, GM, Toyota, and Nissan all do not-X.
clarkma5
Honestly, sounds more like a personal problem.

I don't see coilsprings vs. leaf springs as win/lose, but as a compromise with different priorities. Coilsprings will be 1) less proven, 2) more expensive, 3) different to package than before, 4) frowned upon by hardcore, conservative truck guys, while offering a different (presumably improved) ride quality and god knows what else. Six of one, half dozen of the other in the end, but for someone like me who knows how a good car drives, I'll take all the help I can get in getting my pickup to ride and handle a little better.
dukenukem
The hummer and the suzuki are a joke to me.
The Silverado is probably the nicest truck out there but the hybrid in it is kinda pointless.
The F150 looks uglier than the previous model.
I just hate how all Dodge trucks look.

Therefore by process of elimination i choose the F150 for being the least bad truck of all.
darinzon
redneck sheeeet
Razor
QUOTE(darinzon @ Feb 25 2009, 12:26 PM) *
redneck sheeeet


I wonder who voted for the Suzuki? tongue.gif
clarkma5
The Suzuki's not so bad, it's just a rebadged Nissan Frontier, which is a fine truck. Plus it's the only compact truck here which may appeal to some more than the full-sizers.
Mitlov
QUOTE(clarkma5 @ Feb 25 2009, 02:55 PM) *
The Suzuki's not so bad, it's just a rebadged Nissan Frontier, which is a fine truck. Plus it's the only compact truck here which may appeal to some more than the full-sizers.


H3T's a compact; it's based off of the Chevy Colorado.
clarkma5
Yeah but nobody here will ever vote for a Hummer (except maybe the H1) tongue.gif
Mitlov
QUOTE(clarkma5 @ Feb 25 2009, 07:49 AM) *
Honestly, sounds more like a personal problem.


I asked the pharmacist if they had a topical ointment for Chrysler-distrust and he said they were all sold out cool.gif
clarkma5
Well for your sake (and for Chrysler's), I hope scientists find a cure soon!
Razor
I could use some too, I guess. Chrysler sucks, except for maybe the 300C.
clarkma5
The Challenger, the Ram, and the Viper are their three saving graces in my book.
dukenukem
QUOTE(Razor @ Feb 25 2009, 06:40 PM) *
I could use some too, I guess. Chrysler sucks, except for maybe the 300C.

Viper.
Razor
QUOTE(dukenukem @ Feb 25 2009, 07:42 PM) *
Viper.


I stand corrected. Forgot about it because it's too cool to be Chrysler. The new ACR may be one of the coolest stock track cars ever.
Tyler4
My vote goes to the F-150, no doubt.
Mitlov
QUOTE(Razor @ Feb 25 2009, 04:48 PM) *
I stand corrected. Forgot about it because it's too cool to be Chrysler.


And very soon that may be the case.
Razor
QUOTE(Mitlov @ Feb 25 2009, 09:36 PM) *
And very soon that may be the case.


If it goes to Hennessey, there is good in the world. tongue.gif
dukenukem
QUOTE(Razor @ Feb 25 2009, 08:38 PM) *
If it goes to Hennessey, there is good in the world. tongue.gif

So your car will be made by engine borrowed from your dad's car and wheels borrowed from a mexican taco van.
Razor
QUOTE(dukenukem @ Feb 25 2009, 09:46 PM) *
So your car will be made by engine borrowed from your dad's car and wheels borrowed from a mexican taco van.


Wut?
dukenukem
Hennessey has had a bad rep for using one customer's car parts on another car as brand new parts and such shady practices.
Razor
QUOTE(dukenukem @ Feb 25 2009, 09:57 PM) *
Hennessey has had a bad rep for using one customer's car parts on another car as brand new parts and such shady practices.


Eek.
moe
Clark can you change my vote from the Ford to the Suzuki? I don't really care for big pickups, so I might as well vote small. Plus the Equator is actually a fine truck. It can haul enough for my liking, is decent on road, and pretty damned good off of it.

Also I think Chrysler has plenty of good product:

- Ram
- Viper
- LX platform cars
- Minivans
- Wrangler
- Journey
- Ehh...the Nitro...I know it's not that great of a car, but I really do love the styling.
clarkma5
Vote changed.

The LX platform cars are really woeful IMO. Yeah, RWD and decent looks is nice, but have you sat in one? Jiminy christmas they're bad. As for the minivans, read up on Edmunds's long-term Caravan. It's pretty woeful. I'll agree the Journey's decent, but the Wrangler fails to get my endorsement because it's a worse car now than it was a decade ago.
moe
QUOTE(clarkma5 @ Feb 26 2009, 11:30 AM) *
Vote changed.

The LX platform cars are really woeful IMO. Yeah, RWD and decent looks is nice, but have you sat in one? Jiminy christmas they're bad. As for the minivans, read up on Edmunds's long-term Caravan. It's pretty woeful. I'll agree the Journey's decent, but the Wrangler fails to get my endorsement because it's a worse car now than it was a decade ago.


At the price they sell the Charger at here, I don't care if it's interior is made of play-dough. It sells for the price of a mid-level Corolla, or a base Civic. The dynamics are above average too. It's actually quite comfortable and refined. The 300 makes less of a case for itself. Also, isn't the Challenger's build-quality something resembling respectable?

I've read really good reviews about the vans from Autocar, and haven't really looked into what InsideLine had to say.

How's the Wrangler worse? I've heard people say the old engine was better, but to be honest, I know next to nothing about the cars. I just know the Unlimited version is pretty cool, and that they're amazing off-road.
Benny
the challenger has one of the best road presences of any car on the road today.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.