j-ten-ner

I'd like to give my two cents on the resale value. I'm in the boat of the long term truck owners. Right now I'm indecisive whether to get a new truck at the end of the year or not. Reason is that I'm concerned about any current trucks resale value, since the electric trucks are pushing into the marked. I'm holding on to my '13 no mater what and use it for work. It's just that I'd like to have a truck for straight personal use. And I'm seriously considering to wait another two or three years and see how the electric trucks play out. so long j-ten-ner

My truck is eating rats 😬 I started my truck and the first thing I noticed was that the engine sounded different. Nothing bad, just quieter in some way. Didn't think much of it and put it in gear and started moving, but the power steering didn't work. What the f***? I open the hood and see that the serpentine belt is gone and was lying on top of the skid plate. And the I saw this 🤢 The rat was probably spooked by the starting engine and jumped on/through the belt, got caught and took out the belt in the progress. Yikes.

I don't even know what we're talking about here. MY bottom line is, it is bad engineering. It shouldn't matter if you're towing or not, IF the truck (like mine) is equipped with the tow package. And, IF the tow package is sufficient enough to handle the additional stress on the oil and cooling system. I guess what GM doesn't understand is that I'd be happy to pay a premium for an engine and/or additional systems which support towing and higher rpm. I'm willing to pay for the extra engineering necessary to achieve that, but I'm not willing to pay for a bigger touch screen and 25 cameras just to get a skid plate for the oil pan (you get my drift). so long j-ten-ner

I'm past 100,000mls. It is gonna blow. Tomorrow. For sure. I know it. Shit! so long j-ten-ner

The engine in my truck is burning oil since day one. No lack of maintenance. Oil change done way ahead of manufactures recommendation. It's simply bad engineering. Or a good one when it comes to meet the standards. Probably depends on which way you're looking at it. Another aspect is the way of the driving style. If I stay below 2,500 rpm, it's burning about 1 liter in 3,000 km (1,900-ish miles). When I'm towing or rev up the engine above 2,500 rpm, it'll go up to 2.5 liters. My take on it is that bad engineering and the driving style is what causes the engine to eat oil. More or less. And yes, I've owned other vehicles in the past. None of them were eating oil like the AFM engines I've had. In fact, it was none to zero oil consumption. '82 and '86 GMC van and truck, '87 Chevy van, '88 and '96 Buick regal 2.8 and 3.8 V6, '77 Jeep J10 401cui, European Ford cars , VW cars, Moskvich (Russian car) you name it. No noticeable oil consumption. Except for the '82 and '86 GMC van and truck and '87 Chevy van and the Jeep, the fuel mileage on the other cars listed was comparable to modern standards. I don't know why they can't built engines like that anymore. Or, why can European and Russian car makers build engines with a decent fuel mileage and no oil consumption? so long j-ten-ner

Yes. But I had the shocks replaced with OEM parts. My bad I guess. I've driven many cars, from VW Transporter flat deck or van, Sprinter, Chevy G20, Jeep j10, you name it. But the bouncing of the rear end was never so noticeable as it is on my truck. My truck is rated with about 1,600 lbs of payload. More than the other ones. Maybe that's the reason. We're demanding the highest payload numbers for our half ton trucks and that's the payoff. so long j-ten-ner

That's why I want one of those test trucks. They must be flawless The side stepping of the rear end is annoying. Even after putting on new shocks. A pothole on a paved road and the ass kicks out. What makes me wonder is that our company vans (Ford Transit 1-tons) don't step sideways when hitting potholes or similar. Even empty. Is it a design flaw with our trucks after all? so long j-ten-ner

I thought that I was misinformed. The reason I was asking is that I'm thinking to get me an AT4 at the end of the year and I like the thing with the rear view mirror camera. You have a point with the gear in the truck bed. But then, I'm used to having stuff in the bed of my truck and it doesn't trouble me not to be able to see past it. so long j-ten-ner

My understanding is that the rear view mirror works like an ordinary mirror with the push of a button. No? so long j-ten-ner

Best and cheapest radar detectors I have is to the left and to the right of my nose. And then there's the thing between my ears. No speeding ticket in 20+ years. so long j-ten-ner

Should have bought a Ford...

It wouldn't be the first engine I have to pull out. I was once in the same boat. Always questioning the capability of the engineers who are designing those engines and trucks. But some designs or technologies require some compromising. Maybe there's a good reason for putting the timing chain to the back of the engine. One has to pull the cab off a F350 Power Stroke to change the turbo. Bummer. The timing chain is actually the least of my concerns. As for a run away diesel, maybe there are measures in place. An oil by-pass at the turbo when the engine exceeds a certain rpm w/o throttle input and fuel shut off is not activated (when coasting down a hill). It'll fry the bearings in the turbo but maybe save the engine. How many run-away diesels have you seen? I've had one experience. It was an old Russian bulldozer. Back in 1986. so long j-ten-ner

That's interesting. What group of people? so long j-ten-ner

The payload and towing capacity exceeds my needs. I was torn between the 6.2L or the Diesel for my next truck, but I know that I want this engine! so long j-ten-ner

Hard to say. Living 37 years in Germany and driving for 22 of them (since I was 15), I'd guess 100,000+ km. so long j-ten-ner