If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
|
Posted by aemeijers on November 3, 2009, 11:21 pm
Nate Nagel wrote:
> aemeijers wrote:
>
>> Does anyone make a small pickup any more? Like the rangers or toyotas
>> from 10-15 years ago? All the stuff on the lots now looks huge, not to
>> mention looking like a Tonka toy. Big meaningless chrome phallic
>> noses, pointless huge tires, etc. Does anyone make a truck that looks
>> like a truck anymore? I'm a form follows function sort of person- I
>> don't need rolling bling.
>
> I hear that. It seems that even the full size trucks get bigger and
> bigger. I've got a 93 F-150 and I feel like the bed sides are really
> tall - taller than my dad's '73 Chevy and WAY taller than some old
> Studebakers I've worked on. But parked next to a NEW F-150 mine appears
> comparatively easy to load.
>
> Why is it that both the bed floor and the top of the bed sides seems to
> creep up every revision of a truck chassis? Wouldn't a LOW bed floor be
> a selling feature? Some of these new trucks ought to come with a
> folding stepstool shoved behind the seat.
>
> nate
>
I think a saw a couple brands advertising fold-out bed and bumper steps
a couple years ago. I think they have super-sized the apparent visual
dimensions, and raised the bed and sidewall heights, to make them look
Big and Tough, and in proportion with the giant tires. (Pretty useless
for the 2/3 of trucks that never leave the pavement. And guess what, 4x4
guys? In snow, tall and skinny works better.)
When Ford split off their heavy pickup line about 10-12 years back, they
suddenly had a lot of complaints from gooseneck and 5th wheel owners
(one of the few groups that really need big trucks). The steep rake and
high bedsides meant the old hitches were not tall enough, and if they
raised the hitch up so bed sides and trailer didn't hit in bumpy roads,
the tow geometry was all wrong. Guys that pull goosenecks for a living
were having to buy chassis-cabs and get purpose-built diamond-plate
utility beds put on.
As a kid, I had a couple of mid-70s Ford F150s as company trucks. They
drove about like the full-size station wagons, and used the same size
tires. As construction go-fer vehicles, they worked fine. No, I couldn't
haul a full cube of block or shingles with them, but they did what they
needed to do, and a small-block v8 provided enough power. A baby pickup
like the stretch-cab ranger or early-90s toyota would meet 95% of my
current hauling needs, and would probably fit in my garage. (My head
does bang the rear window on the regular-cab version, and you do need
SOME weather-protected hauling space.)
--
aem sends...
|
|
Posted by DerbyDad03 on November 5, 2009, 4:22 pm
> Nate Nagel wrote:
> > aemeijers wrote:
> >> Does anyone make a small pickup any more? Like the rangers or toyotas
> >> from 10-15 years ago? All the stuff on the lots now looks huge, not to
> >> mention looking like a Tonka toy. Big meaningless chrome phallic
> >> noses, pointless huge tires, etc. Does anyone make a truck that looks
> >> like a truck anymore? I'm a form follows function sort of person- I
> >> don't need rolling bling.
> > I hear that. =A0It seems that even the full size trucks get bigger and
> > bigger. =A0I've got a 93 F-150 and I feel like the bed sides are really
> > tall - taller than my dad's '73 Chevy and WAY taller than some old
> > Studebakers I've worked on. =A0But parked next to a NEW F-150 mine appe=
ars
> > comparatively easy to load.
> > Why is it that both the bed floor and the top of the bed sides seems to
> > creep up every revision of a truck chassis? =A0Wouldn't a LOW bed floor=
be
> > a selling feature? =A0Some of these new trucks ought to come with a
> > folding stepstool shoved behind the seat.
> > nate
> I think a saw a couple brands advertising fold-out bed and bumper steps
> a couple years ago. I think they have super-sized the apparent visual
> dimensions, and raised the bed and sidewall heights, to make them look
> Big and Tough, and in proportion with the giant tires. (Pretty useless
> for the 2/3 of trucks that never leave the pavement. And guess what, 4x4
> guys? In snow, tall and skinny works better.)
> When Ford split off their heavy pickup line about 10-12 years back, they
> suddenly had a lot of complaints from gooseneck and 5th wheel owners
> (one of the few groups that really need big trucks). The steep rake and
> high bedsides meant the old hitches were not tall enough, and if they
> raised the hitch up so bed sides and trailer didn't hit in bumpy roads,
> the tow geometry was all wrong. Guys that pull goosenecks for a living
> were having to buy chassis-cabs and get purpose-built diamond-plate
> utility beds put on.
> As a kid, I had a couple of mid-70s Ford F150s as company trucks. They
> drove about like the full-size station wagons, and used the same size
> tires. As construction go-fer vehicles, they worked fine. No, I couldn't
> haul a full cube of block or shingles with them, but they did what they
> needed to do, and a small-block v8 provided enough power. A baby pickup
> like the stretch-cab ranger or early-90s toyota would meet 95% of my
> current hauling needs, and would probably fit in my garage. (My head
> does bang the rear window on the regular-cab version, and you do need
> SOME weather-protected hauling space.)
> --
> aem sends...- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
re: "I think a saw a couple brands advertising fold-out bed and bumper
steps a couple years ago."
Now *that* brings back memories!
My 1966 Rambler Ambassador came with a full size bed installed.
Remember the Blues Brothers song " 'b' Movie Box Car Blues" ?
Next I caught a ride with gambler's wife
She had a brand new lay down Rambler
She parked inside of town, layed the Rambler down
She said she sure could dig if I'd knew her
The rear seat was a full bench. The front seat was bench with a split
back.
If you pulled the front seat all the way forward and reclined the 2
sections of the back of the seat, they lined up evenly with the rear
bench and turned the whole interior into a bed.
The stories I could tell!
http://brining.com/autoauction/1966RamblerAmbassador/1966%20Rambler%20Ambas=
sador.JPG
|
|
Posted by Nate Nagel on November 5, 2009, 6:11 pm
DerbyDad03 wrote:
>> Nate Nagel wrote:
>>> aemeijers wrote:
>>>> Does anyone make a small pickup any more? Like the rangers or toyotas
>>>> from 10-15 years ago? All the stuff on the lots now looks huge, not to
>>>> mention looking like a Tonka toy. Big meaningless chrome phallic
>>>> noses, pointless huge tires, etc. Does anyone make a truck that looks
>>>> like a truck anymore? I'm a form follows function sort of person- I
>>>> don't need rolling bling.
>>> I hear that. It seems that even the full size trucks get bigger and
>>> bigger. I've got a 93 F-150 and I feel like the bed sides are really
>>> tall - taller than my dad's '73 Chevy and WAY taller than some old
>>> Studebakers I've worked on. But parked next to a NEW F-150 mine appears
>>> comparatively easy to load.
>>> Why is it that both the bed floor and the top of the bed sides seems to
>>> creep up every revision of a truck chassis? Wouldn't a LOW bed floor be
>>> a selling feature? Some of these new trucks ought to come with a
>>> folding stepstool shoved behind the seat.
>>> nate
>> I think a saw a couple brands advertising fold-out bed and bumper steps
>> a couple years ago. I think they have super-sized the apparent visual
>> dimensions, and raised the bed and sidewall heights, to make them look
>> Big and Tough, and in proportion with the giant tires. (Pretty useless
>> for the 2/3 of trucks that never leave the pavement. And guess what, 4x4
>> guys? In snow, tall and skinny works better.)
>> When Ford split off their heavy pickup line about 10-12 years back, they
>> suddenly had a lot of complaints from gooseneck and 5th wheel owners
>> (one of the few groups that really need big trucks). The steep rake and
>> high bedsides meant the old hitches were not tall enough, and if they
>> raised the hitch up so bed sides and trailer didn't hit in bumpy roads,
>> the tow geometry was all wrong. Guys that pull goosenecks for a living
>> were having to buy chassis-cabs and get purpose-built diamond-plate
>> utility beds put on.
>> As a kid, I had a couple of mid-70s Ford F150s as company trucks. They
>> drove about like the full-size station wagons, and used the same size
>> tires. As construction go-fer vehicles, they worked fine. No, I couldn't
>> haul a full cube of block or shingles with them, but they did what they
>> needed to do, and a small-block v8 provided enough power. A baby pickup
>> like the stretch-cab ranger or early-90s toyota would meet 95% of my
>> current hauling needs, and would probably fit in my garage. (My head
>> does bang the rear window on the regular-cab version, and you do need
>> SOME weather-protected hauling space.)
>> --
>> aem sends...- Hide quoted text -
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> re: "I think a saw a couple brands advertising fold-out bed and bumper
> steps a couple years ago."
>
> Now *that* brings back memories!
>
> My 1966 Rambler Ambassador came with a full size bed installed.
>
> Remember the Blues Brothers song " 'b' Movie Box Car Blues" ?
>
> Next I caught a ride with gambler's wife
> She had a brand new lay down Rambler
> She parked inside of town, layed the Rambler down
> She said she sure could dig if I'd knew her
>
> The rear seat was a full bench. The front seat was bench with a split
> back.
>
> If you pulled the front seat all the way forward and reclined the 2
> sections of the back of the seat, they lined up evenly with the rear
> bench and turned the whole interior into a bed.
>
> The stories I could tell!
>
>
http://brining.com/autoauction/1966RamblerAmbassador/1966%20Rambler%20Ambassador.JPG
>
I believe the Studebaker Wagonaire (remember, the wagon with the sliding
roof?) had an available fold out step on the tailgate. The funny thing
is you really didn't need it as the load floor was so low to the ground
(even before the rear springs inevitably sagged...)
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
|
|
Posted by Jules on November 4, 2009, 10:25 am
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 18:55:14 -0500, aemeijers wrote:
> Does anyone make a small pickup any more? Like the rangers or toyotas
> from 10-15 years ago?
Probably not :-(
We've got a '67 F100 with the long bed for when we need to move anything
that won't fit in the car. No power brakes, power windows, power anything.
Beautiful to work on - the sort of tech where you can often do an
emergency fix it by the side of the road if needed using spit and baling
wire :-)
Sure, it doesn't like going over 55, but who really gives a crap?
cheers
Jules
|
|
Posted by Tony on November 4, 2009, 10:37 am
aemeijers wrote:
>
> Does anyone make a small pickup any more? Like the rangers or toyotas
> from 10-15 years ago? All the stuff on the lots now looks huge, not to
> mention looking like a Tonka toy. Big meaningless chrome phallic noses,
> pointless huge tires, etc. Does anyone make a truck that looks like a
> truck anymore? I'm a form follows function sort of person- I don't need
> rolling bling.
Oh gawd, I know what you mean about the Tonka toys. Big fat fender
flares with giant fake plastic bolts. How much uglier can they get?
Actually that is an unfair comparison to Tonka Toys, the toys look much
better then the real trucks.
|
Page 3 of 7 < 1 2 3 > last >>
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap
>