Leaving Gmc for ford

[J-man67]

Good luck with the new truck. I've finally realized that all of these trucks are built under the same guidelines. They all have to perform for what they are built to do. That is the bottom line. I have a 15 5.3 max tow. I bought it to use as a truck and it does it well. I tow 4-6k almost daily so this truck works for me. I have 60k on the truck now and I beat the absolute piss out of it. I try to tell myself to take it easy but with the GM truck history I have, I am confident this truck will last just as long as my 04 Colorado, and 07 Sierra. I beat on them and they never gave me issues. That's enough for me to hang with the GM brand. I am by no means biased because of my choices, but I'm confident with these trucks and they perform the way I expect them to, for what I needed them for. I like the new Fords and I wouldn't mind giving them a chance. It's just after 3 perfect GM trucks, it's hard for me to really consider. Now the new Mustang... I eye phuck them whenever I see one. I'm rambling on now, but my point is... If you like it, if it works for you, and puts a smile on your face when you walk up to your truck...then do YOU!

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

[George C]

I'm a Super Duty diesel lover, and believe the Ford Heavys are a superior truck, but in my opinion, Ford gassers suck.

I personally think the entire Eco boost engine lineup is a joke, and I would hope that they would make a comparable platform to the 6.2l. GM gas engine.

I ordered a 17' Ford Explorer for our vacation home in Fla, and after test driving the "new" 2.3l Eco boost, I ordered the standard 3.5l. The vehicle has zero power unless it's on full boost, so where is the advantage?

Ford is taking a small engine and banking on better mileage when boost is not needed. Trouble is that boost is ALWAYS needed to make enough power to perform.

Not buying it.

 

We towed our 6k boat yesterday with my wife's 6.2l Denali for the first time. That thing would tow circles around my dog 6.0L 2500hd.

[kp52]

I'm a Super Duty diesel lover, and believe the Ford Heavys are a superior truck, but in my opinion, Ford gassers suck.

I personally think the entire Eco boost engine lineup is a joke, and I would hope that they would make a comparable platform to the 6.2l. GM gas engine.

I ordered a 17' Ford Explorer for our vacation home in Fla, and after test driving the "new" 2.3l Eco boost, I ordered the standard 3.5l. The vehicle has zero power unless it's on full boost, so where is the advantage?

Ford is taking a small engine and banking on better mileage when boost is not needed. Trouble is that boost is ALWAYS needed to make enough power to perform.

Not buying it.

 

We towed our 6k boat yesterday with my wife's 6.2l Denali for the first time. That thing would tow circles around my dog 6.0L 2500hd.

 

Indeed, I had a '13 Ecoboost and I hated it. To get any decent mileage you had to give it no throttle and it drove like a little V6, sure it was quick when floored but it also drank gas horribly if you drove it aggressively. It did tow OK, but the way the loaded FX4 I had was configured the cargo capacity was 1028 lbs lol, I didnt know at the time the max tow package was a necessity on a loaded ecoboost crew 4x4 if you wanted to tow anything.

 

I just have a 5.3 3.42/A6 and I dont think the power is that bad, if anything the throttle mapping and shift programming sucks and makes the truck feel a lot heavier/slower than what it is. Just have to give it more gas and it pulls just fine, I dont tow over 7K with it and it does just fine in mountains.

 

I buy a new truck every year, the ecoboost was the only car/truck in a long time I couldnt stand to drive just a year and was rid of it after 6 months.. It had a fairly common issue at the time when it was raining if you tried to pass or get on the highway (lot of throttle) it would misfire, die and wreck a catalytic converter. Dealer couldnt fix it so they put me back in a new Ram at an exceptional deal, I assume that is all straightened out by now but I would never buy another ecoboost because of it.

 

Anyhow nothing is perfect, every new truck as its good/bad points. Personally I had the best luck with the newer Rams, but after three in a row I got sick of them, tried the ecoboost them switched back to GM for the last couple since they have been discounting them heavy.

[SouthernSilveradoGuy85]

I'm a Super Duty diesel lover, and believe the Ford Heavys are a superior truck, but in my opinion, Ford gassers suck.

I personally think the entire Eco boost engine lineup is a joke, and I would hope that they would make a comparable platform to the 6.2l. GM gas engine.

I ordered a 17' Ford Explorer for our vacation home in Fla, and after test driving the "new" 2.3l Eco boost, I ordered the standard 3.5l. The vehicle has zero power unless it's on full boost, so where is the advantage?

Ford is taking a small engine and banking on better mileage when boost is not needed. Trouble is that boost is ALWAYS needed to make enough power to perform.

Not buying it.

 

We towed our 6k boat yesterday with my wife's 6.2l Denali for the first time. That thing would tow circles around my dog 6.0L 2500hd.

 

The only thing I'll add is that even though I have zero experience with Ford let alone the Powerstroke, even I know that the 6.0 Powerstroke was probably the worst diesel that has been put in a pickup. Other than the 6.0 I'm sure the other Powerstrokes aren't bad.

[Icecreman]

 

The only thing I'll add is that even though I have zero experience with Ford let alone the Powerstroke, even I know that the 6.0 Powerstroke was probably the worst diesel that has been put in a pickup. Other than the 6.0 I'm sure the other Powerstrokes aren't bad.

 

I had a 6.0 Powerstroke. Yep they're that bad. What a nightmare that engine was. It's a shame because I liked the Superduty otherwise. I also had a '12 Duramax but got rid of it due to all the exhaust emissions issues but that's pretty much a problem on all makes these days. 9 repairs on the exhaust was enough for me to say bye bye. No more diesels for me.

[Icecreman]

To the OP. Don't pay attention to the haters and good luck with your new truck. I personally don't see how your post was offensive at all. I do hope you post back here after a bit and tell us what you think, good or bad. Hopefully it's all good. They're very nice in my opinion. I think all of the bashing and brand loyalty is absolutely ridiculous. I don't care who makes my truck as long as it's what I want. I considered an F150 Platinum but was concerned about the ecoboost/small engine and problems down the road so I went with a Denali 6.2. As others have said, all of the brands are great trucks and all of them have drawbacks. Just pick the one you like and buy it. Trucks cost way to much money to buy just based on the emblem on the grille. I was a brand loyalist as a younger person because of what my father drove. With age I realized how stupid that was and how nice it is to look past the emblem.

 

As far Vette goes... damn I'm jealous! It's on my bucket list.

[Abearclaw]

I've finally traded in my 2015 GMC Sierra SLT after 17k miles . To be fair the Gmc is a nice truck I really have no complaints with the truck except the engine and Trans just are not for me. The truck gets great gas mileage but has no balls and the Trans is clunky. I tried a programmer and it still sucks , so I purchased a 2016 f150 platinum ecoboost.

Your complaints are in fact legit. Sorry to see ya go but damn at least you did it right and got a platinum, I otherwise am not a fan of the ford interiors. Sounds like you got a nice truck tho. Oh, do some research on the engine sludge on ecoboost engines. You may consider an oil catch can. Normally there's not much use for them but the ecoboosts have had issues keeping their manifolds and valves clean.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tnchevy]

The simple fact is that all the truck choices out there are built as cheap as possible for the highest profit possible and they all seem to be getting worse IMO.

[Jake56]

To the original poster.........thanks for leaving the GMC family, you will now have helped to increase the average collective intelligence of us remaining GMC owners. (you were dragging us down)

[George C]

The simple fact is that all the truck choices out there are built as cheap as possible for the highest profit possible and they all seem to be getting worse IMO.

 

I'm guessing that you may be young, and weren't buying trucks 20-30 years ago.

Today's trucks are far superior from their predecessors.

[L86 All Terrain]

How is the 5.3L a dog? It makes the same power with a better torque curve than 5L when on E85, and it does it more effiecently with 3 less camshafts and 16 less valves. If you ask me, the 5L is a dog. Not to mention its poor oiling system and hollow block.

[Icecreman]

To the original poster.........thanks for leaving the GMC family, you will now have helped to increase the average collective intelligence of us remaining GMC owners. (you were dragging us down)

 

This statement just reduced the collective intelligence of GM owners.

[Newell33]

I'm guessing that you may be young, and weren't buying trucks 20-30 years ago.

Today's trucks are far superior from their predecessors.

 

I absolutely disagree with this statement based on my experiences owning many new GM trucks since the year 2000. The trucks are loaded with more features today, but the quality control and engineering of the features in my 2014 were far inferior to the 2013 that I'm driving now.

[Britt Lifsey]

My first, a 1976 Ford F100 Ranger, was as bullet proof as a tank. The straight 6 engine never batted an eye. Most posters here might think the "3 on the tree" was a bit clunky, especially downshifting into first. But, it had manual windows and door locks, I was the power assist for steering (aided by a large circumference steering wheel) and brakes. I also had to hold the key in start position until engine was running...oh my, the horror.

[SouthernSilveradoGuy85]

 

I absolutely disagree with this statement based on my experiences owning many new GM trucks since the year 2000. The trucks are loaded with more features today, but the quality control and engineering of the features in my 2014 were far inferior to the 2013 that I'm driving now.

 

Really, the oldest truck you've had was a 2000? This '14 is the first truck I've owned that is a 2000 and something. First was an '86 C10 Chevy and then a '98 Z71. Only owned full size Chevy trucks. The '86 didn't even have A/C, but it was solid and dependable. I haven't had any problems with my '14 in the 2+ years of owning it. The '98 wasn't dependable, but that was probably from how I treated it.