Skip to main content

A Retro-Grouch Goes Truck Shopping

Urban Dictionary dotcom defines a retro-grouch thusly:
-noun
1. One who is skeptical of technological developments until their usefulness and reliability have been proven.
2. One who insists on minimalist equipment that may be user-serviced.
3. Sagacious but irritable expert.
OK I plead guilty. Nevertheless I defy you to find a better example of the absurd depravity of modern American culture than the pickup truck. I have never liked them, especially compared to vans, which are my preferred tow vehicle. Alas, vans are going through big changes these days to meet the fuel economy requirements. I am not eager to buy a used van that has become orphaned and obsolete. And really, their fuel economy does suck.

Considering how many complications they are willing to add to the new vans to coax them into slightly better fuel economy, wouldn't it make more sense to just make them smaller, like the late Chevy Astro van? Ahh, but that would be 'turning the clock back', which would violate the "Whig Interpretation of History." They could also make pickup trucks the size of a Toyota Tacoma in the 1990s, but that ain't gonna happen neither.

That leaves a ghastly full-sized pickup truck for my next tow vehicle. Somebody I knew once said that "half of driving is parking."  That memory came to mind recently as I sat in front of a coffee shop and watched these ludicrous vehicles trying to parallel park. And if the turning radius and sheer length of the silly things weren't bad enough, the sides of the cargo beds are so high that it takes a step ladder to reach in and pull something out.

Can somebody who used to work in the automotive industry think more clearly and choose a motor vehicle better than the general public? You'd think they would have an advantage. They should have the same mindset toward motor vehicles that, say, a middle-aged male gynecologist has towards women. But so far, this supposed advantage hasn't really paid off for me.

Gee I've got a lot to say about this topic. Hence I've been procrastinating, as we usually do when a project looks too big.  So let's break it up into small pieces each day...

Comments

Hypothetical question...If you could find a tow vehicle that got better gas mileage...say 22 to 25 mpg (which I think exists, but is too out of the box for someone like you), would your travel circles expand beyond what they have been reduced to lately?
Box Canyon Mark
Wayne (Wirs) said…
You had looked at, and appeared to like the Nissan NV (I'm that close to buying on myself). It's basically a Titan with a box on it. What changed your mind?
Agree on the trucks. I had a Toyota T100 that was perfect, but it finally wore out. I then bought a new Tundra. It was ghastly - after driving a T100 I felt like I'd fallen down the rabbit hole. Actually, I think it was Touyota that fell down the rabbit hole. Sold it. I would love to have a nice pickup, but the big monsters just don't fit my need for simplicity, plus they cost way too much.
Tom said…
The Ford Econoline won't be discontinued till 2014 now and I don't hear any talk of the Chevy Express being discontinued any time soon. If you're still interested in downsizing a little there's the MB Sprinter at not much more than the Fords or Chevy vans. You could do a conversion like Glenn. I really like the Sprinter and have talked to quite a few people with them. FedEx drivers love them and haven't had any problems. One full time couple was even pulling a 20' Big Foot travel trailer with their sprinter and they had a couple kayaks on the roof of the sprinter too. They do a lot of disbursed camping too. Anyway, food for thought. Grains of salt optional...
Yes I like the Nissan NV van. The fuel economy is only about 18 mpg on the highway, unhitched. Also, it is a foot and a half longer than an Econoline Ford van (with standard wheelbase.) Who wants longer!
Their cost is ridiculous. The profit is over $10,000 on the damn things. Customers are stupid.
The new full size pickup trucks DO get 22-25 mpg on the highway, unhitched. But that wouldn't change my travel habits much, except that I would hit Utah more.

I don't like the aridity, heat, low altitude, and mosquitoes of the northern half of the West.
Tesaje said…
How about a tow worthy SUV? Don't know enuf to say what kind...
Forgot something, Wayne. I wouldn't mind the extra length of the Nissan NV if I was going to convert the van itself into my living space and pull no trailer (or maybe just a small cargo trailer for bicycles, propane, water.)

But I think I prefer to keep the tow vehicle uncomplicated and light, and take it off to a trailhead to go mountain biking or hiking, and get 20 mpg on the way there.
A Mercedes Benz Sprinter costs over $40000, doesn't it? But you're right, I should look into them more before ruling them out.

I wonder how easy it is to repair and buy parts for them in the small town rural West.

I'm trying to stay open-minded about converting a van, but I think I like the idea of converting a cargo trailer much more. Then the tow vehicle can remain "stock," and I can drop the trailer and head off to a trailhead to mountain bike or hike.

Yes, that's an interesting idea: the size of some SUVs is quite reasonable, unlike full-size vans and pickups. But SUV fuel economy is about the same as a pickup, and for the same reason.

But SUVs tend to be ridiculously overpriced for the same reason that pickup trucks are. Also, they have windows all around. Oh, I hate windows. I want my darlings invisible.

I considered the RAM C/V Tradesman, which is basically a Dodge Caravan built in windowless form, with a transmission oil cooler, and a 3500 pound tow rating. But still, look at the front wheel drive and the low ground clearance!
TomInBellaVista said…
If you still are carrying four bikes with you, I don't know how you can get away from a van of some sort. Also, and I'm making assumptions about your mind set, you seem to be considering a new vehicle. Is this the case?
I had four and a half bicycles. But with the austere stoicism of an old Roman retrogrouch, I've downsized to 4.0; simplicity and all of that, you know. I can visualize carrying this abstemiousness all the way down to three bicycles.

Theoretically it could be reduced to two. But not a drop less than that. That would fit a capped pickup truck.

I prefer a 2010 model, a few thousand dollars less than a new model, with under 50,000 miles. Model year 2010 is when most brands installed traction control as standard equipment on low-trim-level pickups and vans. Four wheel drive is a rip-off.
Chris said…
You harp on mpg. Have you done the math? Are mpg REALLY that big an influence as a % of your annual budget (if you have one)? Is the decision factor of mpg a deal-breaker if you find a vehicle you really want but is a little thirsty?

Chris H
Jerry, (via email)
Ref aug 21 comment by spotted dog ranch , 9:53 am
Not sure my comments went through on the iPad ?

PLEASE DON'T DISPARAGE TUNDRA TRUCKS - if you have never owned one .......

After 5 years and 80,000 miles I can get 85-90% of my money back @ current Kelly blue book & Craig's list prices I paid $33k plus T&L ... I have had ZERO DEFECTS .....today private party sale is $29k & dealer is $34k
Tundra cost me so far $1,000 per year - best deal of my life so far !!!

Show me something better BEFORE - spotted dog trash talk tundra trucks. I can't believe he ever owned one - and is certainly in the DARK AS TO THE FACTS !!!
Now now, Jerry, play nice. Spotted Dog was just describing her experiences with her Tundra. "Your mileage may vary", as the old saying goes.

I believe what you said about Tundra (or at least Tacoma) resale prices. In fact they are so high I just ruled out a used Tacoma.

Either buy a new one or don't buy one at all.
Unknown said…
hey now boonie, i was just at the gmc dealership, getting my oil change, so i took a walk round the new truck lot . talk about sticker shock, saw this nice four wheel drive gmc half ton $53.995 !!! i guess i will be keeping my 07 for a while. fellow traveler gary
I had a brand new Tundra. It drove like a dream and got good mileage. I'm 5'8" and still had to climb to get into it. It had bells and whistles I would never use. I had to build the bed up to put my Lance camper on it because Toyota decided to make the siderails 2" above standard. I felt like I was driving a big American pickup in the darn thing, like Toyota had totally sold out efficiency and simplicity to compete with American trucks bells and whistles. I'm glad I sold the darn thing. I now drive a Toyota FJ Cruiser and love it. I won't argue Toyota holding value or quality, just their lack of staying with good truck models that worked (earlier Tundras and T100s).
That's the problem with writing in small installments: danged smarty-pants readers get ahead of me! (grin)
Anonymous said…
Yep, the price of those new trucks is crazy and agree parking our F250 w/extended bed is a challenge. Thus hubby drives his truck, the F250, and I drive my little '05 Tacoma....love it. BUT what I really want to know is What exactly IS the mindset of a middle-aged gynecologist toward women? ;-)
Chris said…
Didn't you do this on purpose so we readers could do most of the cost-analysis for you before you completed the installments? (grin)

Chris H
Just one more side comment, the Tundra is an American MADE Truck - built in Austin Texas factory, it might have a rice burner logo on the hood, but its just as American as a Ford, a Dodge or a Chevy Truck. Its born in the U.S.A. Now we might be able to split hairs as to what percent of each is built in the USA - but that is a different story. Personally my feeling is, its much better then the old Tundra or T100's which I would never had gotten. I have not compared the 2013 models as I am expecting mine to last another 10 years min and to hit an easy 250,000 miles.
If I had a gun pressed to my head and had to guess, I would say its an unnecessary appendage,
but I'm not naming any names...

The subject cannot be googled, so maybe we can start a new topic ?
Bob said…
Well now, I started to glaze over after about the twentieth comment, so I may repeat what someone else has said.
I too have looked with some consternation at new pick-up trucks, and I just walk away. Back in 03, I bought a brand new Tundra. It was just that much smaller and different from the others on the market, and I had seen a few in Puerto Rico when we lived there. So I was intrigued.
When we moved to Europe in 08, I sold it to my nephew. He loves it. I miss it. NOW, the new Tundras have gotten as big an goofy looking as all the competition. What's with the big grill? Anyway, I'm far from deciding on what I want for a second vehicle, so we'll see.
I saw a couple VW pick-up trucks when we lived in Vienna. Great looking truck. Not marketed in North America though....
Maybe just a small electric pick-up for around town. That would work for me. What's taking Tesla Motors so long?
gypsycowboy said…
all the beating up on people for driving a full size pickup? Using "Ludicrous" and other insinuations of low intellect; is a bit wearisome.

To say that those folks are somehow mindless wasteful slugs is kinda rude.

When the average american is living in well over 1000 square feet and consuming 100+ gallons of water, each, a day, I find it a lil bit pompous to be accused of wasteful pretension for driving a full size pickup to haul my 30', 280 square foot home, in which we average less than 15 gallons a day for two people and two dogs.

If living ALONE in a tiny space toots a person's whistle that's fine... but adjectives about OTHER peoples chosen way need to be juuuuust a tad less derogatory... when they're Lifestyle consumes no significantly greater space and material, and maybe even less, than the judgmental single person's...

It takes a certain minimum size and weight to safely pull a trailer. Period. Going less than that lacks the power to control that weight. I'm not talking 45 foot five slide mansions. I'm talking my mid roofed, thirty foot fivers, like mine, that houses two of us. A hell of a long way from wasteful ostentation.

Too big for you? say that. More than YOU need? say that. "They're stupid, wasteful, ostentatious fools consumed with materialism because they live in 140 square feet apiece and drive the vehicle capable of safely handling that size?" ... I don't think so.

Don't like it for you, that's fine... but ripping on people because they like something different than your way is... well, it is what it is.
TomInBellaVista said…
I saw my first Tesla a few days ago. Consider that I live in Arkansas, and this was in a Walmart parking lot. I noticed this beautiful car as we were walking in, didn't recognize the make, but on the way out the owner was loading in his purchases, so I stopped and talked to him. He was more than enthusiastic, said, "Everyone should have one of these in their garage." I went home and googled, to find out that his model with options was around $90K. I didn't get the opportunity to ask him if he thought everyone could afford one. I see where you can order one online, and they will deliver to your house. I think I am going to have to call Amex and ask for a credit line increase. NOT.
I believe I mocked the machines, not the drivers. If not, I apologize.

It is circular reasoning to believe that pickup trucks are non-ludicrous just because they are necessary to pull a ludicrously-oversized trailer.

Comparing RVs to houses is a straw-man argument. Recreational VEHICLES are just that: vehicles. They are not portable houses.
edlfrey said…
Boonie,
I don't think you need apologize. You did use the word "ludicrous" in describing the size of full-sized pickups but I found no reference to the people that drive them or buy them.
I did NOT find any place where you said the following where Cowboy appears to be quoting you.
"They're stupid, wasteful, ostentatious fools consumed with materialism because they live in 140 square feet apiece and drive the vehicle capable of safely handling that size?"
Maybe he got your posting mixed up with someone else when he went off on a rant.
Jim and Gayle said…
Please tell me that you won't (gasp) drive a, I can't bear to say it, vehicle to a trailhead.

Who has gotten to you? Did they drug your latte?

Jim
Boonie the more you say - the deeper the hole becomes that you are digging !!

You said "customers are stupid" referring to those who purchase PU.

Above I explained to you it cost me $1,000 per year to drive my Tundra ? Best deal of my life......what brand new vehicle have you owned that had less then $1,000 deprecation per year over 5 years. I'm getting 85% of my original value back.

Every other vehicle that I or most others owned certainly lost 50% in the first 3-5 years.
Boonie said buyers of PU are stupid, but I would like to know how full sized vans compare to PU's ?