|
About Me
I'm the Pickups host here at Edmunds CarSpace.com - be sure to check out the Pickups forums if you have or are interested in one!
Recent Posts
Categories
CarSpace
The Big Rigs
We're gonna talk about the big ones... trucks and buses that require those 3 marker lights front and rear. Everything from dual rear wheel pickups to class 8 trucks to the bus that takes you to work.
 As the former owner of a 1996 Ram 3500 and the present owner of a 2005 Ram 3500, I've been awaiting this introduction for quite some time. It was going to determine whether I hung on to my 05 or started saving for a new one.
In my blog post on the 2009 Ram 1500, I noted three things that I hoped would appear on the 2010 Ram HD, and it looks like I scored on all three. The front bumper is indeed fully separate from the body (unlike the 1500) so that auxiliary equipment like plows and winches can be installed easily. The ST model offers an all-vinyl interior that you can get dirty. And the front springs in particular have been uprated and it now appears that they may permit a snow-plow package for the diesel pickups (a Dodge first, Ford has offered it for years).
As for the truck itself...
Likes:
I like the overall design appearance. Even though the cab is the same as the 1500 introduced last year, the HD doesn't have a "consumer" truck look to it.
I am very pleased to see that Dodge followed GM's lead and is using a steel integral fender on the dual-rear-wheel trucks. Ditching the bolt-on fiberglass fenders makes for a cleaner appearance, more paint options, better build quality, and better airflow.
I do like the more aggressive hood and grille. The 1500 has a smoother rounded look, while the HD has a chiseled grille, taller hood with extra clearance for the Cummins diesel, and even scalloped "louvers" on the sides.
The tow mirrors are slightly larger and incorporate a larger convex section. And I appreciate the return to black-faced gauges with white markings... I thought my white-face gauges on my 2005 were pretty cool when I got them, but after 4 years, that novelty wore off long ago, and depending on where the sun is, shadows can make them tricky to glance at.
Dislikes:
As I mentioned with the 1500, I'm no fan of single "uni-bulb" taillights. My 2005 has separate rear turn/hazard lights, which means people behind me have a better idea of what I'm about to do.
 While I like the hood itself, I am very displeased by what's under it. The underhood access on my 1996 was excellent. The 2005 is OK. Dodge knows full well these trucks use a LARGE inline six-cylinder diesel, so hood length should be taken into account during the design process. Not only is the underhood area more snug than my 05, but now they've added one of those huge black shrouds around the engine. I guess in their research, they forgot to ask how many HD truck owners do their own maintenance. When combined with the fact that the grille is no longer attached to the hood, anything in front of the engine (fan belt, etc.) will require the removal of this shroud... and I don't even want to think of what will happen if it's not tightly secured when it's reinstalled.
I'm a bit disappointed that the floor-shift for the 4x4 system is now limited to the base ST trim level and the off-road themed Power Wagon. I have always gotten the "comfortable" SLT trim level, but now that means I must have the electric dash control for 4WD. I had it on my 93 Ford F150, so I'm not a stranger to it, but I prefer the feel of that floor lever. (I know everything is computer-controlled anyway, but what the heck.)
Surprises:
 The Mega Cab is back! Who knew they were actually going to retain this, with the introduction of the new Crew Cab? But unlike the 1500, the HD line will no longer offer the Quad Cab (which is the equivalent to everyone else's extended cab model) - instead, they will offer the regular, Crew, and Mega cabs to the HD market. This makes Dodge the only truck manufacturer with 4 cab sizes.
Overall, I think Chrysler did a pretty good job on the redesign... I'll give them a solid B grade. Guess I should start socking away the money for a new Ram 3500 Crew Cab DRW 4x4... with the Cummins diesel of course!
 The excuse for getting rid of the floor-mounted 4-wheel-drive shifter was to improve front seat legroom and reduce floorspace clutter. As such, my 2005 Ram may be the last truck I own with such a floor shifter.
Then I saw the new trucks introduced at NAIAS, the 2009 Ram 1500 and F150. Both have introduced these huge full center consoles with floor-mounted automatic transmission shifters (the Ram is pictured to your right)... especially odd for the F150 which no longer offers a manual transmission.
I have had a fair number of people ask me if the front bench is actually still available - or in today's trucks, the 40/20/40. It wasn't all that long ago that trucks didn't even have head restraints. My 1990 F150 had none, and a bench seat so flat, you might get similar lumbar and thigh support from the bleachers at your high school's football field. And the old shifters were directly connected to what they were shifting. With drive-by-wire, you can mount the shifter to the ceiling if you wanted. Some buses have had pushbutton trans controls for over 20 years.
So now, manufacturers are telling me, at least in these new half-tons, a full console with a floor shifter is the next greatest thing. So if it's not a problem for this huge console that wipes out a front passenger seat, can I have my 4x4 floor shifter back when the heavy duty pickups are redesigned?
The last thing a misbehaving child wants to hear on a road trip...
 New Jersey is thinking about coming back there. The state assembly has introduced bills that will strengthen the existing seat belt law to include adults in the rear seat(s), and to raise the fines for not securing a child from $20 to as much as $500.
Most of us with sense buckle up as it is, so such a law should not intrude on the majority o drivers. But it will be interesting to see if these bills face challenges, and on what grounds. There was also no immediate information as to whether the proposal would apply to cars for hire, such as taxis and limos.
Then there is the decades-old debate about seat belts for buses. Because buses in general are allowed to operate with standing passengers, a seat belt law has generally been a no-issue - how would someone holding the ceiling grab rail buckle up, and to what? Bus company owners have argued that, unlike airplanes, buses don't operate in a complete terminal-to-terminal mode - passengers can be picked up or let off en route. And a bus driver is often not in a position to verify that everyone is buckled properly, where airplanes are staffed with attendants for that purpose. Proponents of a seat belt regulation for buses have attempted to delineate the use by specifying the bus type, but this has been effectively defeated by many local transit authorities purchasing "over the road" motorcoaches for suburban express service. So I doubt this will ever happen any time soon.
Regardless, if the buckle is there, use it. It beats the alternative.
The 2009 Dodge Ram 1500 and Ford F150 were revealed today at the North American international Auto Show. As a current Ram owner and former F150 owner, I certainly feel qualified to offer my pair of pennies on these new designs. So here goes:
 2009 Dodge Ram 1500
I like the evolutionary design changes on the exterior. The lines are cleaner, getting the aero value back down to where it was with the 1994 design. I understand why the grille is no longer attached to the hood, but i will miss that. I also have a problem with the rear "uni-bulb". My 2005 Ram has separate rear turn signals/hazard lights, and since I drive in the dark every work night, complete lighting is very important to me. A single bulb can be misconstrued by inattentive drivers, plus you lose brake light function when hazards are on - only the high-mount brake light actually functions in this situation. There is certainly enough room in the new truck to allow for separate rear turn/hazard lights. I think Dodge made a good move by creating a crew cab over continuing the oversized Mega Cab. They may lose some bragging rights, but the truck will be a lot easier to handle. One thing I find very annoying though - on both the quad and crew Cabs, the rear seat cushion is cut down in the center - this makes child-seat placement almost impossible - especially for a rearward facing infant seat, as there's not enough cushion to support it.
Which leads me to the rest of the interior. I like the new dash and gauges. The front seats clearly have improved bolstering for more back and side support, which is appreciated by those of us who make long commutes. The increased number of storage bins will be useful for most buyers, and the materials used are definitely an upgrade. But I have my complaints, too. Still using the beige upper interior, no matter what color seats/dash/carpet you order (see my blog entry "Every day is a gray day") tells me the effort to improve the interior is only half-hearted... the common beige pillars and headliner are strictly a cost-savings move. Go the extra mile, will ya? We're paying for these trucks (and quite a bit of money too); don't shortchange us because of an accounting decision. And again, we're only offered tan and gray.
Next year, it is expected that the heavy-duty Rams will be brought to the new body style, and in speaking with fellow Ram owners, there are some things we want to point out:
- the front bumper and fascia can't be integrated with the fenders. Bumpers need to be removable and adjustable for installation of items like winches and snow plows.
- don't forget those who need a truck to actually be a truck... rubber/vinyl interiors that won't be ruined on a muddy ranch, but still have soundproofing where the luxury interiors do, and manual locks and windows that won't freeze on a subzero morning when the job doesn't take a day off for weather.
- heavy duty springs that won't sagf under a load (or in my case, over time from the weight of the Cummins)
Those of us who buy and use this class of truck don't expect the same ride as a Chrysler 300, we expect these trucks to do the job their weight class dictates.
2009 Ford F150
I drove a 1990 and 1993 F150 (broke 'em both, thus my moved to duallies). One thing still bothers me... Ford is still the only manufacturer who thinks the half-ton pickup shouldn't share its body with its big brothers. This cheapens the F150 to a lot of people - it gives a perception of not being as rugged as the Super Duty models.
The exterior changes from the 2004 design are minimal, just as the 2008 Super Duty essentially has just a new front clip and new tailgate... the doors of a 2008 SD are exactly the same as those from the 1999 model introduced 10 years ago. While not a terrible styling exercise, two details stand out as negatives:
- the mirror mounting area in the front door is almost as large as the old vent windows... why does that have to block out so much glass space and visibility?
- I commended Ford for moving the headlights on the 08 SD to the bottom of the cluster, making them more effective by being closer to the road - so why not the same for the new F150?
The interior is a pretty evolutionary change from the current model. Not too crazy about the combination of rectangles and chrome-ringed circles in the dash design... I'm more of a no-nonsense "just give me the controls, ma'am" person (blog entry "Too much information"). I also think 7 trim levels is way too many. The STX and FX4 should be one "sport" trim package, and why so many luxury trucks like the new Platinum? Isn't that what the Mark LT is for?
Then there's the high bed sides. In the Ford press release, Matt O'Leary (who headed the engineering effort of the new truck) noted that owners had trouble reaching the bed due to the high sidewalls, and observed owners trying to climb on the tires, or using objects to stand on. But rather than following the request of owners to lower the sides to previous levels, O'Leary decided that a step attached to the truck was a more progressive solution. Say what? Since when is a step safer than standing on solid ground? Reaching into the bed is usually done to load or unload something... if you have to also balance yourself on a step just to reach the bed, that item you're trying to lift will change that balance and you run a very real risk of losing that balance and falling. Not smart at all, Ford. I've been driving full-size 8-foot-bed pickups exclusi9velyt for over 17 years, and I do not take my personal safety lightly when loading or unloading cargo - I shouldn't have to worry that my feet won't be where I put them.
Personally, I think the Dodge was better executed in this round of redesigns. Both trucks will get their share of truck of the year awards from various sources, but the bottom line will be sales. With the falling market share due to the economy and other factors, the people who will be buying expensive trucks will be us hardcore truckers. Don't give us cars with beds, please.
 Most consumers don't order their cars... they look over the dealer inventory and find what comes closest to what they want. Conversely, truckers order exactly what they want right down to the tire tread on each axle.
Heavy duty pickups are getting caught in the middle.
Because of the surge in sales of full size pickups over the last 15 years, manufacturers have increasingly followed the lead of cars and make their trucks available in large option "packages". This saves costs by reducing the number of configurations and cutting build time. And with the notable exception of Ford, whose heavy pickups are on a completely separate chassis and body, these cost saving measure are shared over the entire line. This option package mentality is understandable for small and midsize cars because of the volume and lack of profit margin... pick a color, pick a primary package, and drive home.
But does that really serve the intended customer of a heavy duty pickup?
I ordered my 1996 and 2005 Dodge Ram 3500 SLT dually pickups, exactly the way I wanted them. But if something happened to my 2005, I could not order an equivalent 2008 because of the new option package mentality. Part of my 2005's features are in the 2008 SXT trim level, and part are in the 2008 SLT trim level. If I am willing to sacrifice what I can no longer get in an SLT, I still have to get an option package that includes things i have never ordered and definitely don't want. not surprisingly, most of these "extras" are electric or electronic and expensive to repair if they fail.
And this is not to single out Dodge... all the manufacturers do this.
But heavy duty pickups and chassis-cab trucks (250/2500, 350/3500, 450/4500, 550/5500) are purpose-built, and primarily for people who need a truck to be a truck. I like a comfortable supportive seat, but I shouldn't have to spend hundreds extra for premium cloth or leather to get it. If I want the steel fold-out floor for the rear, why do I have to now order a package that includes an alarm system? What do those two things have to do with each other?
When a trucker sits down to spec their next rig, they make sure it's going to do the job. They can specify things like suspension type (air or leaf pack); tire size, brand, load rating, and tread; engine brands, size, and power rating; transmission type and number of gears; brand and model of seats; the number of gauges and which functions; even the number of marker lights and turn signals. Not saying my next truck needs to be that customizable from the factory, but if I want a particular component, I shouldn't have to order 10 things I don't want or need.
A dually is not a consumer vehicle or a "family car". It's a duty-rated vehicle that should be configured to the desires of its owner in order for it to perform the needed tasks. I don't want "fluff" with my "stuff"... but I fear that's exactly what I'll have to suffer through the next time I sit down at a sales desk in a showroom.
Vehicle interiors used to come in all kinds of colors. Between 1972 and 2001, my dad's vehicles had the following colors (in order): green, brown/tan, navy blue, brown, black/gray, black, navy blue. He almost bought a car with a red interior instead of the first blue one.
But lately, there has been a disturbing trend that new vehicles have an incredibly limited selection of interior colors... almost the modern day equivalent of the Henry Ford Model T line: "you can have any interior color you want, as long as it's gray."
I find it ironic, and to an extent, embarrassing, that manufacturers are being incredibly daring with exterior paint, but so ultra-conservative with interiors. For 2008, the Dodge Ram will offer bright orange and bright yellow paint... yet no matter what exterior color you buy, you're limited to a gray or drab beige interior choice. In contrast, when the redesigned Ram was introduced for 1994, interiors were offered in charcoal, a bright tan, red, and blue.
My current truck is Patriot Blue Pearl in color... I would have loved to have ordered a rich blue interior with it - and I mean all of the interior. Chrysler in the early part of this decade took to designing vehicles that had a "taupe" headliner, no matter what interior color you ordered.
Part of this is the automakers' fault. Instead of making cars lighter and more efficient, we're presented with these overweight sedans and light trucks that try to compensate with ridiculously angled windshields and back windows in the name of "aerodynamics". Which means there are large expanses of dashboard and rear shelf that will reflect sunlight all over the insides of these expansive sheets of glass, making it difficult for drivers to see on bright days. So in order to reduce the effect of that reflection, we're given these drab gray interiors.
One thing we consumers should not accept is a compromise of extra safety equipment in a vehicle that doesn't permit us to drive in the first place. I see it every day when i get to work and park my Dodge Ram dually straight and centered in its parking space, and look at all the cars elsewhere in the lot that are anywhere but straight because these severely angled windows, downsloped hoods, and high trunks don't actually allow drivers to see where their car is aimed.
And of course, nearly all these cars have that drab gray interior so as not to distract the driver.
The exterior is for onlookers, the interior is for the driver. As the driver and owner, I want a choice as well.
|
|
