Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you Sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

  • Announcements

    • Rick

      Members Only Fluid Forum View   08/08/2017

      Fluid forum view allows members only to get right to the meat of this community; the topics. You can toggle between your preferred forum view just below to the left on the main forum entrance. You will see three icons. Try them out and see what you prefer.   Fluid view allows you, if you are a signed up member, to see the newest topic posts in either all forums (select none or all) or in just your favorite forums (select the ones you want to see when you come to Fishing Minnesota). It keeps and in real time with respect to Topic posts and lets YOU SELECT YOUR FAVORITE FORUMS. It can make things fun and easy. This is especially true for less experienced visitors raised on social media. If you, as a members want more specific topics, you can even select a single forum to view. Let us take a look at fluid view in action. We will then break it down and explain how it works in more detail.   The video shows the topic list and the forum filter box. As you can see, it is easy to change the topic list by changing the selected forums. This view replaces the traditional list of categories and forums.   Of course, members only can change the view to better suit your way of browsing.   You will notice a “grid” option. We have moved the grid forum theme setting into the main forum settings. This makes it an option for members only to choose. This screenshot also shows the removal of the forum breadcrumb in fluid view mode. Fluid view remembers your last forum selection so you don’t lose your place when you go back to the listing. The benefit of this feature is easy to see. It removes a potential barrier of entry for members only. It puts the spotlight on topics themselves, and not the hierarchical forum structure. You as a member will enjoy viewing many forums at once and switching between them without leaving the page. We hope that fluid view, the new functionality is an asset that you enjoy .
Sign in to follow this  
Murdock

4 wheel or 2 wheel F-150 or Chevy 1500??

Recommended Posts

I am in the market for a used 1/2 ton extended cap truck. (Ford or Chevy). I drive approx 50 miles round trip to and from work within the Twin Cities Metro area. I have found the 4X2s to be less expensive, obviously, but need to keep in mind the following. I have a 16 foot Lund Rebel that is looking to be towed by something a little bigger than a mini-van with a 3.3 liter engine. Almost all of the lakes I fish have ramps that do not require a 4X4 and want to get the best gas milage I can.
Will a 4X2 get better gas milage than a 4X4?
If yes, what milage can I expect.(City and highway).
Will a 4X2 be able to tow up to 2000 without a problem?(I tow the Rebel up to 150 miles quite often).
I've received some great info from this web site and am hoping the replies you give will help make this decision.
Thanks in advance for your knowledge and/or opinions.!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you say used what year and price range are you looking at?

Reason I mention this is unless you are planning to purchase this vehicle in full, you may be better off, speaking in terms of monthly payment, buying a new one with all the incentives that are on the market now.

Plus with the amount of travel you do it seems gas mileage is important to you. Well, a 5 year old truck isn't going to get close to the gas mileage of the new ones on the road today. I think this is going to be a bigger difference then comparing 2WD and 4WD trucks of the same year class.

Just some things to consider. If you are potentially planning to pay for something in full then I know of a few newer Chevs that are for sale that may meet your needs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 4x2 will get better gas milage and should handle that boat with no trouble. I had a 4x2 chevy and trailed a heavier rig with no troubles. Don't know what the newer 4x2's do for milage. My 1985 got 16-17 on highway.
I have a 97 3/4 ton chevy 8' box 4x4 gets 12mpg when trailering and in city, maybe 14 on the highway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If your after just gas mileage than the Chevy may be a better choice, if your going to buy a newer truck any way.
If you want towing power and a fair mileage truck get the Ford, they always seem to have more torque for the towing.They don't get teriable mileage usualy with in a few MPG of the Chevy's .
As for 4X4 vs.2X4 , if you don't need to go through lots of snow ,mud or up steep ramps get a 2wd truck.A good set of tires on a 2wd will go places a 4X4 can't go if it has bad tires, I used to drive nothing but 2wd's never had a problem if I didn't try to go where it just couldn't.

One more note to consider,the newer six cylinder engines have a lot more horse power than they did just a few years back, and they genearly get a lot better mileage.

Benny

P.S Buy the Ford, out of 20 years of owning them I only had one lemon that was an 84 2wd with the 300 six. smile.gif


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had two '01 Super Crew F150's for delivering boats.
I loved both of them and had no problems.
That being said, the Chevy 1500's we use now, with the 5300 engine gets better milage towing my boats and doesn't downshift as much as the Fords did.
The Chevy,s have also been reliable.
Good luck with your choice!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I am a Chevy Guy and I am not going to go into what Benny said about fords getting better fuel mileage with a 4X4. All I know is that at work we have a 99 with a 302 for and when ever something is pulled behind it it gets not better than 10 MPG.

I myself have a 2002 Z71 and I get 16 mpg highway and 12-13 mpg towing a Explore boat which is simliar to what you have.

With that said as far as 4X2 to 4X4 I couldn't live with out a 4X4 but I realize not everyone is like me. I do a lot of ice fishing and if I didn't have a 4X4 I couldn't ever get on a lake. I also have to use my truck for work and I would have to say that with a lot of the places I take my truck you couldn't even consider with a 4X2. But whether to get a 4x4 or 4x2 I wouldn't let the little difference in fuel mileage affect my decision. If you think you will use the 4x4 get it if not don't. Good luck with your decision.

One more plug for a chevy if you are looking at a extended cab you have lots more room in a Chevy than a Ford like 4 inch more. It may not seem like much until you are crammed in the back of a Ford and then go to a Chevy. I am sold on Chevy and will never buy anything else so I am bias.

------------------
Grip it and Rip it

IFFWalleyes
I Fish For Walleyes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My dad picked up a 96 Suburban 4x4 1/2 ton last year and it gets about 18-20 MPG on the highway with the vortec 350.. the mileage has never noticably dropped from pulling heavy loads... in fact most of the time you cant even tell your pulling anything unless you look in the mirror. They are truely awesome pulling machines, and better average gas mileage than my Jeep Cherokee ..

4 wheel drive is not a neccessity unless you are going offroad on occasion, dealing with bad ramps .. or driving in a bad winter in Minnesota... obviously winter does not make it a neccessity, but its sure nice to have, and can actually save gas if being stuck is a factor (burn more gas stuck in a snowbank for 5 minutes than running it over in the 1st place).

The 4 wheel drive also has a better resale value.

Personally, I have not had great luck with fords overall, but I have had a couple decent ones. If I had to make a choice, I would stick to Chevy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

iffwalleyes, Please re read my post!I never stated the Ford 4x4 gets better mileage than the Chevy,in fact I stated they get worst mileage than a Chevy.The Fords didn't have the 302 in 99, just till 96.

I get 17 MPG at 65 mph pulling a 1995 lund explorer with a 40 hp merc. And it wont down shift at the first wind gust either.In fact,I don't even have to take it out of OD to pull the boat.

My 1992 F150 sc 4x4 with the 302 fi got 15 mpg pulling the same boat package.Just not at 65 mph but at 55 mph.That truck did not like any thing over 60 mph for gas mileage.

Benny

[This message has been edited by Benny (edited 07-02-2003).]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stand corrected Benny and am sorry I misread your post. I know they didn't have the 302 but it is what ever the equivalent engine is to that one what is it now like a 4.8 liter.

Everyone has there opinions but I wouldn't trade my Chevy with the 5.3 for anything other than the new Chevy with a Duramax.

Just one other comment who ever says that Ford are the best price trucks are right but that same person hasn't ever been to that parts stores because it doesn't hold true there.

once again Benny I am sorry for misreading your post.

------------------
Grip it and Rip it

IFFWalleyes
I Fish For Walleyes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What ever you do dont get a dodge.
I have a 2000 ram quad cab, and i think most of us here know what kind of mileage I'm getting, heh.

After owning a 4x4 several years I would never go without.

My next truck. GMC 2500 HD duramax

I love the chevs. too, but I like the fron t end of the GMC more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest

I love all my Fords I've owned, always been excellent vehicles. I can't tell you how many times (almost every boat launch this year) I have had to switch the 4x4 into gear to get my boat out of the water. The water levels have been low on my area lakes and my rear tires always have to practically go under water to get the boat on the trailer. Then I get stuck.

Then again, maybe it's just a "Ford" thing. tongue.gif

Buy a 4x4. Easier resale, about the same mileage and very nice in the winter months. More money of course, but it's worth it IMO.

I have the '97 F150 5.4L Ext. cab and these engines/powertrains are very strong. I pull skidsteers, my heavy 17' boat with a pick-up camper, snowmobiles, etc... If you can put it on a trailer, I'm sure I can pull it smile.gif

Fords have better powertrains from mechanics I've talked to. Mileage on mine is around 15 mpg empty, 12 towing.

Chevy's do get better gas mileage, but I have more power!! LOL!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of guys have mentioned the Chevy/Duramax option.

If you can afford it, diesel is a great way to go. They are more money up front, but the resale is great. 4WD is not necessary, but I'll never go without it.

I went diesel in late 2000, and have never looked back. I drive back and forth from the Fergus Falls area to the Twin Cities every week. I put on roughly 650 miles a week. At that rate I was going through a gas engine about every four years.

I have the Dodge 2500 with the the Cummins inline six with a six speed manual transmission. That engine has incredible pulling power from idle up to about 2500 RPM. On summer blend fuel, I average 19.5 mpg unloaded, and about 18 towing up to about 4000 lbs. Winter blend fuel is 1-2 mpg less.

Winter starting has been no problem.

I looked at Chevy and Ford diesels, and found them to be high quality units also. I just liked the Cummins engine better.

After 94000 miles, I have been extremely happy with this truck. I am on a quest to see if I can go 500,000 miles.

Prior to that I drove a Ford Bronco with the 302 that was a very good tow vehicle. I still have it. Right now, it has about 275,000 miles, having gone 195,000 on the first motor.

The wife drives a 1990 Chevy K1500 withthe 350. It has been a great vehicle also, and now has 150,000 on the clock.

I bought a 1987 F150 new with the 302. That thing was never quite right, and I had a lot of trouble with that truck. After 110,000 I traded it in on the Bronco and never regretted it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  



  • Posts

    • sorta helps, I'll find it...  thanks... me and google just got it.....     have to go see!!
    • Hall of Fame? You must be joking...... Every player starts out like that. No one starts out with a 23 m dollar contract. He still averaged about 15 million per year for his career, that average probably goes up if he plays past 2018. I think he will be ok.
    • Joe was also the 74th highest paid player the year he won the MVP. You may say he is over paid now but he was underpaid 1st half of his career. @Bobby Bass   I don't think Joe is a future Hall of Famer, not even close to borderline but a great player none the less. I think if the Twins would have made a deeper playoff runs back when Morneau was healthy and Santana was Cy-young would have helped. But Joes playoff numbers are terrible. I could maybe see HOF if he would have stayed at catcher his entire career though..... But he will more than likely end up winning a gold glove at 2 positions, and with one being catcher that is pretty elite.
    • Big Dave most if not all pro contracts are paying you for what you have already done with the hope that you will continue to produce. Looking at todays contract Joe's is not to out of line for a future Hall of Famer
    • Great! He is finally earning a contract close to what he is being paid. 
    • thx.  directions are on the site below. just across river from college    http://www.munsingerclemens.com/the-gardens/munsinger-gardens 2 areas, up top and down by river
    • Free agency is far from a sure thing, if there are young centers out there (big if) you have to compete with maybe 10 or 20 other teams and pay way over what you should. You have control of nothing and are at the whims of a player everyone is chasing. Same with trades, very easy to swing and miss. By most account we were in on Ryan Johansen with the Preds but Columbus wanted Jones over Brodin and I don't blame them. 
    • Good stuff but time wiill tell. Not buying the "oh we might lose him as a UFA"...so what, with that kind of money we could buy just as good and younger to give us more of a future...which we desparately need to be thinking about.  Fletch is walking a tightrope and it is going to break IMO.
    • Come on BB, you are better than that. You as much as anyone know that ONE player doesn't make an NHL Team a Stanley Cup contender so why put that blame on him. Sure, a player like Crosby certainly helps, but we aren't talking about the money that Crosby is getting here either. Comparing Koivu's contracts to equivalent players with similar production is quite compelling. He has performed better than many of his peers for his current contract and with the lower AV of his new deal if he continues similar numbers it will be a bargain. I wasn't too happy about the NMC either, but I take that as a bargaining chip so CF didn't have to go with a longer term deal. 2 years is sufficient and I think it works well for both parties. You are right, there are many people out there with more knowledge about the market and what he could have gotten elsewhere and when it may have made sense to sign him, but the fact is you don't want to wait to sign him until after the season for if no other reason at all than to allow him to be a UFA and hear other offers. This will be my last post about the Koivu extension because clearly we don't see eye to eye on whether it made/makes sense, but I assure you there are a large number of "hockey minds" that are in agreement with me on this. Here is some afternoon reading for you: https://www.hockeywilderness.com/2017/9/20/16332552/mikko-koivu-contract-extension-minnesota-wild-criticism-overpaid-chuck-fletcher-cap-space
    • Red admiral i believe.
  • Our Sponsors