Hey Eric,

How fast does Cartest say your Impala is?

 

I dunno, but those would be published "numbers" and would have to be treated as the gospel, right?

 

PacerX, I hesitated to even reply to your first series of ramblings because I figured you wouldn't listen to what I was saying in the least. All I can do is suggest you go back and reread what you wrote and what I wrote. Obviously you feel that power is all that makes a car good or bad. And that's great for you. But don't flame other people because they don't agree with you there- that's called being close-minded. And considering that you're in the minority with your mindset (although admittedly not on this particular board), you might begin to realize that life outside your opinion exists.

Then again considering your temper and flaming disposition, I doubt that's going to happen anytime soon.

The fact remains that:
-You compared the 4.8 to the 4.6 even though Ford's claim to fame with the new F150 is the 5.4 they spend millions designing and tooling for. Hell, why don't I just go on ahead and make a thread comparing the two V6s in these trucks and then insinuate that is the end-all be-all of which truck is king.
-And then when asked what you think about the 5.3 compared to the 5.4, you say "well the 6.0 is better".
-You repeatedly claim that the 1500HD is a 1/2-ton truck and therefore the 6.0 is a valid comparison for competition to the Ford 5.4
-And in the end you find out the 1500HD is a 3/4-ton and therefore your only option is to compare the 5.4 to the 5.3

I'd suggest you check your shirt, I think your bias is showing. And personally I think bias is a bad way to compare cars.

 

haha, cartest....

 

Never seen PacerX go on a rampage like this!

Man, I suppose I should remove the time in my sig. Not too proud of it, should be quicker, but I actually did run my car at a poorly-prepped track when a tune up was needed...

I agree with PacerX about GM trannies generally being superior, but then again, how many people have had to bolt Ford 9" rears to their F-bodies because we've NEVER had an a$$-end that can reliably handle 400+ RWHP

Guess both sides have their weak points and their strong points.

 

Mark,

You'll never hear me criticize you running a 14.6... and running it honestly. I've been to Lapeer... I know what that pit is like... actually, I've been kicked out of Lapeer before... but that's another story...

Anyhoo, you're dead on about the rear-ends, but a 12-bolt can get you to the 9's - which is plenty fast in my book.

If I ever run an honest to goodness 9, I'll die happy.

 

"PacerX, I hesitated to even reply to your first series of ramblings because I figured you wouldn't listen to what I was saying in the least. All I can do is suggest you go back and reread what you wrote and what I wrote. Obviously you feel that power is all that makes a car good or bad. And that's great for you. But don't flame other people because they don't agree with you there- that's called being close-minded. And considering that you're in the minority with your mindset (although admittedly not on this particular board), you might begin to realize that life outside your opinion exists.

Then again considering your temper and flaming disposition, I doubt that's going to happen anytime soon."

Excuse me there, Mr. Martyr... I do believe you started your first little literary jewel in this exchange with the word "dumbass".

I do believe any flames you received after that were fair game.



"I'd suggest you check your shirt, I think your bias is showing."

Ummm... it's blue with a kind of checkerboard to it... short sleeves.



"And personally I think bias is a bad way to compare cars."

Honestly, you're probably right there... that's why I just fired off the specs. You know those pesky math guys... always coming up with those rotten specs...

In the end...

Cartest is a much better way to compare cars.

 

As Pacer said, GM has the 12 bolt if they wanted to use it. But stronger rear ends like the 8.8 inch, 9 inch, or 12 bolt are not only heavier but also less efficient. The 10 bolt is plenty strong for the way the car leaves the factory, and if it helped the f-body gain a tenth of a second, or gain a MPH, or gain a fraction of a MPG, or save a few hundred dollars off the MSRP, then I can understand GM's decision.

 

I've never used Cartest to compare cars other than for my own amusement and ponderings.

Anyhow... this whole thread started by me questioning your comparison and how legit it was. I shouldn't have called you a dumbass, I admit, but that's where my flaming stopped. You then took it about 10 steps further flaming me every other sentence and even attacking me personally over things that have absolutely nothing to do with this thread.

And in the end, you were wrong about the initial arguement. But it's funny how you keep ignoring that part!

 

"Anyhow... this whole thread started by me questioning your comparison and how legit it was. I shouldn't have called you a dumbass, I admit, but that's where my flaming stopped. You then took it about 10 steps further flaming me every other sentence..."

Generally, I limit flames to one per paragraph... if the meter works out correctly, I'll throw two into a single sentence, but it's gotta have the right "feel".



"... and even attacking me personally over things that have absolutely nothing to do with this thread."

***SNIFF***


Hrumph... look, if you're gonna start a post with "dumbass", you surely have to realize that you've just set yourself up for a little marshmallow roast...

Anyhoo, howza 'bout you make yourself useful.

Here's how:

Pick a price point (say... $30,000) and see what you get from Ford and then compare it to what you get from Chevrolet. Purely objective analysis, the numbers won't lie.

What truck gives you the most payload, towing and power at the lowest weight with the most extras (like, leather or dual-zone climate control or CD players and such)?

I don't know the answer to this exercise, so there's no prejudice here and the analysis would be completely objective.

I'd ask you to find the best truck to haul around a 6000 lbs. trailer at the lowest price with an extended cab, but we already know the answer to that exercise. That's about what the combination of my Camaro, a trailer and all the necessary junk would weigh.



"And in the end, you were wrong about the initial arguement. But it's funny how you keep ignoring that part!"

Welp, unless Ford comes up with a better base V8 and a 600 lbs. lighter truck with a better payload and towing capacity the comparison stands.

Numbers are numbers. End of story.

 

PacerX, I have seen a side of you now that has caused me to loose considerable faith in your ability to wage friendly and fruitful debate. After the article you wrote about contracted labor in the engineering field, I thought we were pretty much equals in thought and common sense - I loved that article, and as a guy who [reluctantly] manages our "outside" help here (including draftsmen, designers, and even engineers), I knew EXACTLY what you were saying and felt your conviction. I even printed it out and shared it with my cohorts here at our engineering center. I have shared many views with you of late. I have agreed with your position on many issues - based on clear and rational thinking.

So what gives with you in this thread?
Haven't you even noticed the lack of posts from the traditional crowd in this thread? You've alienated almost all the impartial, common-sense weilding individuals - even those who are pro-GM for crissake.

What's with all this spouting about "specs"? They are OK for metrics, but they are not the gospel when it comes to successful vehicles - you know that.
So you actually bought your car based on a spec-sheet? Sight unseen? No test drive? Really?
Let me quote your response to Gloria... "I do. Bought a car off the spec sheet - my current 2001 Camaro SS. Fastest machine I could get my hands on at the time for less than $40,000."
So if I build a covered wagon with a 425hp engine that will do 0-60 in 5.1 and the 1/4 in 12.8 and offered it for $39,999 - you'd buy it. Even though it had a wood bench seat, a wooden stick brake, four leaf springs, no shocks, and a canvas arched roof... OK - whatever.

Dude, think about what you have written for the last few days.
I'm not going to defend Threxx - he's a grown-up and can fend for himself, and the dumb*** comment was out of line IMO, but he still makes some good points which you fail to stand up maturely and credit him with. The greater man doesn't have to stoop to low levels, he makes his points intellectually.

Z28Wilson was dead-on with the 9" rear comment too. Yet after you lamely admit that 9" units are widely used in GM products in place of 10 and 12 bolt units, you can't resist saying "but a 12-bolt can get you to the 9's - which is plenty fast in my book."
So what happened to "the specs"? 9's ain't gonna bring you home any trophies in heads-up when the competition is running 8's and even 7's! So you buy only the BEST, by the numbers? Well, there are oodles of SuperFord, NMRA, and 5.0 cars running BELOW 9-second times now - using 9" rearends, 8.8" rearends, and with AOD transmissions too! Modded - yeah, but you won't pull 9's out of a stock unit either so stock was out the window when you said 9's.

Look, I'm not preaching to you from afar, and I'm not going to tell you what to say or how you should behave - that's not my style. But I will say that this thread has exposed an unprofessional side that's unappealing in this particular forum. This is the kind of fodder that I am accustomed to seeing in lounges - but not in THIS forum. Heated debates are fine, but rationale is essential even in heated discussions.

An old John Conlee song comes to mind...
:chorus:
These rose-colored glasses...
that I'm looking through...
see only the beauty...
cause they hide all the truth...

Look, you don't owe me squat. You don't have to change anything you are doing. You are sharp on certain things - no doubt. Perceptive on many topics to be sure. I just wanted to point out that you have exposed a new side to many of us in this particular forum - one that may not be very flattering - that's all.

 

He specifically said in his opening title
"New F-150 vs. Silverado (spec vs. spec) "

He said nothing about "all 2004 F-150 offerings", "old model", red ones, or cloth seats.

NEW means the redesigned model to me - since that's what all the hype was about, and he even stabbed at the new design being defficient.

So my contention stands. NO V6 IN THE NEW F-150.
Did you even go to the website I linked? Try to find a V6 in the new F-150.

Nice try though!

 

My opinion on the Nissan Titan-

Great Truck...but the styling alone is enough to make most people just stick witha domestic or go to a Tundra. It is abrasive to look at and from what I have seen the current mess of styling (Maxima, Murano, Quest) though trendy is not over with your average Chevy or Ford truck buyer who see it as disgusting.

 

Proud,

***Please note, you won't find flame#1 in this response.***

1) Thank you for the compliments, and I even appreciate the constructive criticism.

2) I guess this lost track through the flame wars that went on, but the ORIGINAL purpose of the commentary was to point out specs, AND ONLY SPECS, and compare them. I've stated more times than I can count that there ARE many other reasons to buy a vehicle, and folks buy them for many other reasons. BUT, if you take a base V8 new F-150 and a base V8 Silverado, the Chevrolet has a better spec sheet.

That was THE ONLY point. I DO NOT feel that I offered anything other than an objective analysis of the two vehicles at the start. Disagreement and accusation of bias entered in when others clamied I had purposefully offered data only advantageous to Chevrolet, or that the conclusion was somehow wrong.

I offered the data that met the criteria (4x2, base V8, extended cab). Others want to offer different criteria, then post the information. I would only ask that the vehicles are kept as close to each other as possible (no mid-V8's vs. top V8's, or extended cab vs. crew cab).

I have repeatedly stated that I would love to see that comparison.


3) "So if I build a covered wagon with a 425hp engine that will do 0-60 in 5.1 and the 1/4 in 12.8 and offered it for $39,999 - you'd buy it. Even though it had a wood bench seat, a wooden stick brake, four leaf springs, no shocks, and a canvas arched roof..."

In a word, yes. Now, I'm being a little bit sarcastic there, but the intent when buying the Camaro was a single criteria - the fastest new car I could get for the money I had.

I'll buy a new Corvette in the next few years, possibly with different criteria and for different reasons.

I've got a good chance of buying a new full size truck THIS year, and the criteria will be very simple:

4x2.
Extended cab.
Biggest V8 I can get.
Air.
Automatic.
Trailering package (at least 6000 lbs. towing capacity).
Lowest price.

Right there I've established my conditions for purchase. You will, however, find that I will give up interior features and ride "quality" very quickly to gain more power, or higher towing capacity, or other mechanical considerations that are easily quantified.


4) "Z28Wilson was dead-on with the 9" rear comment too."

Let there be no doubt as to my opinion, when maximum power is the issue, the Ford 9" is king.



Your opinions are well taken and considered.

 

Well, if your actually willing to give up ride quality and some other features for towing capacity and power...
Do like I did and get an F-250 Superduty with the 7.3 Powerstroke and 4x4 Off-Road package! I'm J/K with you a little about the Ford - I know where your passion is.

Seriously, I've pulled 10,000 pounds behind it with no problem, doing 75-80 mph (in a 70 mph zone BTW), in OD (A4), and get 19-20 mpg all day long. 480-520 mile range between fill-ups. It looks great, roomy as all get out, and pulls like a road tractor (same engine... so it should).
But I'm going to say right now, that as much as I love the truck (and it's "specs" )... it's got it's downfalls.
It rides like a friggin' bulldozer when it's empty, and my mom can't climb up into it even at stock height. The suspension is so hard, it is actually hard on your insides to ride for any long distances - even with the captain's chairs, power seats/power lumbar and all the other goodies. Now, put 6000lb of landscape gravel in the bed, and it rides like a Lincoln or a Caddy. It's also a pain to do maintenance on because it's too high to stand on the ground, but too low to warrant a step ladder. While I'm at it, 14-quarts of Rotella-T and an $8-filter every 3500 miles is also a major hemorhoid. $700-worth of 6-ply Michelins and a $113-set of front pads were a big 'roid too. And washing/waxing this big black monster is something reminiscent of an old Amish barn-raising... it takes all day and requires all the family and neighbors to help get it done.
The point - you gotta give a little to get a little.

GM's 2500HD is also a great hauler and the Duramax is garnering a pretty good reputation thusfar, and in terms of diesels - yes - it is still a "new" engine. Diesels should go 200-300k miles with only rotine maintenance and there just aren't many Duramax's that far along yet.

Your comment about willingness to sacrifice some ride quality or other benefit to gain power/towing is EXACTLY why I bought my Superduty. If you really have work/hard play to do... they are worth it. To tow big boats, cars, farm tractors, etc don't even bother with the 1/2 ton trucks. Likewise, if you are going to move a lawn tractor around once a month, don't waste your time or extra money on a Superduty 3/4 or 1-ton.

My position in "trucks" is clear - they are for my work/hauling needs - PERIOD. When I want a smooth ride, I'll take the Eddie Bauer or the Town Car. When I want to go fast and cut some curves, I'll take a Stang out for a ride. I realize that some folks want a one-does-all vehicle, and for those folks, maybe the 1/2-ton needs the best ride, best handling, and best towing/payload capacities available. That's OK for them, but that kind of 1/2 ton means nothing to me.
So yeah, let's see Toyota or Nissan try to come into my house with a 1-ton anything close to my Powerstroked Superduty, Dodge's Cummins HD, or the General's Duramax HD trucks...

For the rest of the stuff... as I said, you don't owe me any explanations about anything. I could definitely see that there was a lot of passion in what was going on - and passion is a good thing when used properly IMO. This thread would be normal fodder in the lounge area, and I wouldn't even give it a second thought. Nor would I have posted, because I DO KNOW WHICH WEBSITE I'M AT (some have been quick to point that out). Again, the professionalism and the knowledge of the guys (and gals) in this forum are what makes this particular forum one of the best on the web IMO - regardless of who's brand it falls under.

So now it's water under the bridge... let's move on! It's all good.