Used Truck Buying

[Vetgas]

I am looking at buying a used truck to be a woods truck. I don't care as much about looks as reliability. I am looking at two trucks and just wondering which would on the surface appear to be the best deal.

 

Both trucks are extended cab, 4x4. Really unknown history on both as the seller can tell you anything you want to hear. Both trucks drive fairly good for their age and mileage. No obvious mechanical issues.

 

2004 Chevrolet Silverado 5.3 L with 184,000 miles. Cloth seats. Fair tires. Asking price is $9,500 out the door.

 

2011 GMC Sierra 5.3 L with 270,000 miles. LS trim with cloth seats. Fair tires. Probably about $11,500 out the door.

 

Which on the surface is the better long term buy?

[Chevy Joe]

Carfax can tell you a lot about the history of the trucks !!

[00Silverado4x4]

Honestly if you are looking to beating around in the woods I'd say go with the '04. Either way take them both out for a serious test drive to test and check everything. Also check all the fluids to see if anything may be wrong...such as transmission fluid being burnt. Crawl under both and look for anything and everything from damage to leaks to missing parts.

[diyer2]

Carfax is one of the biggest jokes around IMO, hyped up selling BS. Buying any used high mileage vehicle is a roll of the dice. Check it over well.

[Chevy Joe]

Carfax is one of the biggest jokes around IMO, hyped up selling BS. Buying any used high mileage vehicle is a roll of the dice. Check it over well.

 

So your saying you used it and it was a waste of your time?

 

Because I used it and found out one truck I was going to buy was in a flood, (there were a bunch being sold from hurricane Sandy) and another was in a major crash and had frame damage, The truck I ended up buying was also listed, I could see it had one owner and all the maintenance that was done to the truck

 

When its time to buy a vehicle they have a deal on Unlimited CARFAX Reports for only $50

 

I think the "joke" would be finding those things out after you own the truck LOL

[diyer2]

I will clarify my statement.

If the info is put into the system it works.

I know someone who bought a vehicle with a good carfax that latter was found to have been wrecked when troubles arose.

Nothing is perfect.

[dirtfan21]

I am looking at buying a used truck to be a woods truck. I don't care as much about looks as reliability. I am looking at two trucks and just wondering which would on the surface appear to be the best deal.

 

Both trucks are extended cab, 4x4. Really unknown history on both as the seller can tell you anything you want to hear. Both trucks drive fairly good for their age and mileage. No obvious mechanical issues.

 

2004 Chevrolet Silverado 5.3 L with 184,000 miles. Cloth seats. Fair tires. Asking price is $9,500 out the door.

 

2011 GMC Sierra 5.3 L with 270,000 miles. LS trim with cloth seats. Fair tires. Probably about $11,500 out the door.

 

Which on the surface is the better long term buy?

 

If the 2011 has the 4.8L engine in it and has been well maintained then I may lean toward that one. That engine has almost identical HP/Torque as the 2004's 5.3L and you will get an updated transmission. Also, you change to a strut assembly front end with the 2011 which is IMO much easier to maintain and replace parts. If the 2011 has the 5.3L then stay away.

 

The sheet metal and paint isn't quite as good on the 2011, but the 2004 trucks are known to lose rocker panels to rust.

 

Lastly, mileage doesn't scare me if there are good records on the truck. Try and get as much as you can on both trucks and also pay a reputable mechanic to look over one or both if you aren't comfortable with your own eyes. I wouldn't buy an 80,000 mile truck without good records, but I would buy a 200,000 mile truck with great records. If that makes sense.

 

EDIT: Just read the '11 has the 5.3L, sorry I missed that.... stay away from the 2011!!!

[2018GMC]

When you say stay away from 2011. Is that due to AFM lifter failures and oil consumption issues? I'm guessing the 4.8 didn't have AFM? A plus of the 2011 is the 6 speed auto.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[dirtfan21]

When you say stay away from 2011. Is that due to AFM lifter failures and oil consumption issues? I'm guessing the 4.8 didn't have AFM? A plus of the 2011 is the 6 speed auto.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Yes, at 270,000 miles that AFM system is a ticking time bomb in my opinion. I'm on my second AFM 5.3L with zero issues but neither had high miles, my '07 had 70k on it and my current '13 has 29k. I am not against the AFM trucks, I just would not touch one with that high of miles.

 

Yes, the 4.8L did not carry AFM and was the typical engine in the LS option package for the 4x4's.

[KMGZ400]

I personally don't think either of those sound like a good deal. Maybe keep searching for one with lower miles... Over 10k for something with almost 300k miles? No way

[intheburbs]

Of those two, I'd go with the 2004, but both of those prices seem way high to me.

[Badass69]

Overpriced junk for either one. Way too much money for age and mileage on either truck. Keep looking

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

[Vetgas]

I am not sure if it is tax season or what, but all I am finding seems way too much money for too little truck.

 

What year models and engine combinations should I avoid entirely? When did GM start using the AFM engines?

[intheburbs]

AFM started with the GMT900 rollout in 2007. The 5.3 has it from 2007+. You'd have to look up when it started (if at all) in the 6.0 and 6.2 engines. Pretty sure the 4.8 doesn't have it, but I just think that's too small a motor for a fullsized pickup.

 

You'll notice neither of the trucks in my sig are AFM engines. I won't go near them, and if it ever gets to a point where I can't find a non-AFM GM truck, well then I guess a Hemi or Ecoboost will be in my garage.

[RyanbabZ71]

The 6.2 (non Denali) trucks did not have AFM for the GMT900 model. AFM started with the K2 trucks in the 6.2

 

 

Ryan