Talk me out of buying a Ram BigHorn instead of 2016 XLT?
03-14-2016, 01:20 PM
#91
Senior Member
Go to a few more dealerships and test ride them again. They are both great trucks, but it might help you notice some of the smaller things that you didn't catch the first time.
For example, some things that I realized about the Ram was that even with my size 12 foot, I couldn't depress the brake with my heel on the floor. Doesn't sound like a big deal, until like yesterday when I was in heavy traffic in the snow for multiple hours and my right leg would have been dead. My XLT has power adjustable peddles and my foot is always comfortable.
Just try them a bunch and then buy what feels right.
For example, some things that I realized about the Ram was that even with my size 12 foot, I couldn't depress the brake with my heel on the floor. Doesn't sound like a big deal, until like yesterday when I was in heavy traffic in the snow for multiple hours and my right leg would have been dead. My XLT has power adjustable peddles and my foot is always comfortable.
Just try them a bunch and then buy what feels right.
The following users liked this post:
strorg (03-14-2016)
03-14-2016, 04:52 PM
#92
Senior Member
52 grand for an XLT?? Why not get a Lariat for an extra thousand?
03-14-2016, 08:44 PM
#93
I've owned three F-Series trucks and one 1999 Dodge Ram 1500 4x4, the Fords never caused me any headaches while the Ram needed a transmission at 36K, then sat in the dealership for 3 weeks with an electrical issue. All of these mass produced vehicles have issues, so if the Ram tempts you, I say purchase the damned thing.
When my old Dodge got to the point where it needed an engine rebuild, I started looking at new trucks. Considering between Dodge, Toyota, and Ford, I chose the Ford because I felt like I was getting the best deal at the time I was car shopping.
1.5 weeks and 1500 miles in, no regrets so far.
03-14-2016, 09:00 PM
#94
Senior Member
03-14-2016, 10:35 PM
#95
Senior Member
I could not help but make a comment here in regards to the complaints of those who hold it against GM and Chrysler for the bailouts. I think some here need to take a step back, that is back into some past history. Consider the following:
During World War II thousands of tanks, trucks, engines, planes, jeeps, artillery pieces, etc, etc, were produced by who? That is right, the major auto manufacturers which includes GM and Chrysler as well as Ford. So I have to ask if we allowed GM and Chrysler to go belly up just who would fill in the shoes of major manufacturing? Be able to start production quickly and in large quantities in the event of war on the scale of WWII? Outsource it? Like maybe Toyota and Honda? Obviously you need home based companies for so many obvious reasons.
But lets take this further. Just about any study of WWII credits our victory in part to the mass production of all the material that was needed and delivered by the very companies some here take issue with for now needing help. You think just maybe they earned the right to ask for it? Or just maybe that we as a country need to stop losing manufacturing jobs, and auto manufactures to foreign countries? I tend to think we do.
There is even a more ironic twist to all of this and again relates to WWII. When the war ended Germany and Japan were pretty much devastated, their manufacturing companies and their factories destroyed. The very factories that allowed them to wage war against us. But after the war what did the US do? Provide billions in aid to these countries so they could rebuild Mercedes factories, Mitsubishi factories, and others. The very factories used against us. We did a great job in getting Japan and Germany back on their feet as evidenced by their manufacturing strength today.
So to sort of sum up my point which I know many of you may not agree with, I find it ironic that some take issue in helping GM and Chrysler when we saw fit to help our prior enemies while at the same time forgetting just how we were able to win a world war and just maybe need the same capabilities some time in our unknown future. Just a thought........
.
During World War II thousands of tanks, trucks, engines, planes, jeeps, artillery pieces, etc, etc, were produced by who? That is right, the major auto manufacturers which includes GM and Chrysler as well as Ford. So I have to ask if we allowed GM and Chrysler to go belly up just who would fill in the shoes of major manufacturing? Be able to start production quickly and in large quantities in the event of war on the scale of WWII? Outsource it? Like maybe Toyota and Honda? Obviously you need home based companies for so many obvious reasons.
But lets take this further. Just about any study of WWII credits our victory in part to the mass production of all the material that was needed and delivered by the very companies some here take issue with for now needing help. You think just maybe they earned the right to ask for it? Or just maybe that we as a country need to stop losing manufacturing jobs, and auto manufactures to foreign countries? I tend to think we do.
There is even a more ironic twist to all of this and again relates to WWII. When the war ended Germany and Japan were pretty much devastated, their manufacturing companies and their factories destroyed. The very factories that allowed them to wage war against us. But after the war what did the US do? Provide billions in aid to these countries so they could rebuild Mercedes factories, Mitsubishi factories, and others. The very factories used against us. We did a great job in getting Japan and Germany back on their feet as evidenced by their manufacturing strength today.
So to sort of sum up my point which I know many of you may not agree with, I find it ironic that some take issue in helping GM and Chrysler when we saw fit to help our prior enemies while at the same time forgetting just how we were able to win a world war and just maybe need the same capabilities some time in our unknown future. Just a thought........
.
03-14-2016, 11:18 PM
#96
Winner ding ding ding! It's funny the lengths the rest of the truck mfg's go to to make the floor flat. Some even make a fold down false bottom.
Ram Floor
Silverado Floor
Ram Floor
Silverado Floor
The following 2 users liked this post by bigcitymike:
Sppotlight (03-15-2016),
strorg (03-15-2016)
03-15-2016, 11:58 AM
#97
We recently test drove the F-150, Sierra Denali, RAM Laramie Longhorn, and Tundra 1794.
This is how I would rate each of them....
F-150: I owned a 2015...had the 5.0 and had a lot of problems very early on. We bought it used with 24K miles...had problems at 26K. We had some very serious concerns about buying another Ford. However, we drove a 2016 Platinum and it felt solid, quiet, dare I say...refined? Looked great, had some features the others didn't have, was light-er than the rest...and performed well and sounded awesome while pushing it. But then again...what's all that worth if you need a new engine and transfer case before the truck turns 1?
Sierra Denali: Damn...this was a very, very nice truck. It drove nice, sounded amazing, felt sturdy. At the end of the day, it was missing something though...it's very hard to explain. The rear seat was small. The dash felt cheap...and looked like EVERY GMC/Chevy I have seen for the past 20 years. Additionally, for the price, it was missing some of the features the Ford had. It drove very truck-like however...which surprised me considering I've heard nothing but great things about how much the Sierra felt like you were driving a car...not a truck. Besides all that...we had driven a previous model year and it had a transmission failure on the test drive...with less then 30K miles
RAM: We really liked how the RAM drove...it was so smooth. The HEMI sounded good...pulled hard....the 8-speed shifted/responded better than the GMC's. I just remember hitting bumps though and see the whole entire dash shutter. I tapped the doors and they felt cheap. The shifter **** seemed clunky. It was missing a lot of the features of the Ford/GMC. We did, however, like the looks. It was an amazing color on the outside and the interior was a lot like a King Ranch...just not to the same quality. There was definitely evidence of cost cutting.
Tundra: I hate the looks of the Tundra but I do love the powertrain. The only reason we looked is because of the powertrain reliability. The interior of the 1794 felt high-quality, up there with the GMC/Ford. It was quiet, drove nice. For the price, however; it was lacking features...but I was willing to give those up if it meant less cost-cutting took place on the rest of the truck. At the end of the day, a very good truck all around...but it's definitely behind the rest of the pack in terms of performance, looks...but dependability wise...it's probably one of the best...and fully loaded, one of the most expensive with the least amount of feature bang for your buck.
Needless to say, we ended up with a 2016 F-150 Platinum (not the one I test drove) because it was the best all-around package. The 5.0 feels like a solid motor...I'll get to this in a second...the truck looks amazing, the features are there, it drives just right, sounds just right, and we got the right price for it as well. To be honest, if the Tundra had a tougher look...we probably would have bought the Tundra. The GMC next...the RAM last. The RAM drives nice...but each airbag costs 1000 to replace when it goes. The extended warranty price was insane...almost 5K...which tells me reliability still isn't there. The GMC was just lacking a certain spirit about it...it's hard to explain.
Lastly, the Ford's rear seat is in a league of its own. Not a single one of them had the space of a Ford.
This is obviously just my opinion, but despite the issues I had with my previous 5.0L, I still feel that this engine combined with this truck leads to one of the best all around packages the light-duty truck industry has seen. Despite all the issues we've had...every single one of the trucks I listed have their problems too...even the Tundra. If you don't believe me, go look at their forums. Forums have a way of enlightening consumers in more ways than any other type of media...and while that is a good thing, sometimes it can really suck as well. Ignorance is bliss.
With 200 miles on my truck...I might be eating my words down the road, but I think that can be said for any truck available today. They are trying to do WAY more with far less...it's just natural that quality will deteriorate.
This is how I would rate each of them....
F-150: I owned a 2015...had the 5.0 and had a lot of problems very early on. We bought it used with 24K miles...had problems at 26K. We had some very serious concerns about buying another Ford. However, we drove a 2016 Platinum and it felt solid, quiet, dare I say...refined? Looked great, had some features the others didn't have, was light-er than the rest...and performed well and sounded awesome while pushing it. But then again...what's all that worth if you need a new engine and transfer case before the truck turns 1?
Sierra Denali: Damn...this was a very, very nice truck. It drove nice, sounded amazing, felt sturdy. At the end of the day, it was missing something though...it's very hard to explain. The rear seat was small. The dash felt cheap...and looked like EVERY GMC/Chevy I have seen for the past 20 years. Additionally, for the price, it was missing some of the features the Ford had. It drove very truck-like however...which surprised me considering I've heard nothing but great things about how much the Sierra felt like you were driving a car...not a truck. Besides all that...we had driven a previous model year and it had a transmission failure on the test drive...with less then 30K miles
RAM: We really liked how the RAM drove...it was so smooth. The HEMI sounded good...pulled hard....the 8-speed shifted/responded better than the GMC's. I just remember hitting bumps though and see the whole entire dash shutter. I tapped the doors and they felt cheap. The shifter **** seemed clunky. It was missing a lot of the features of the Ford/GMC. We did, however, like the looks. It was an amazing color on the outside and the interior was a lot like a King Ranch...just not to the same quality. There was definitely evidence of cost cutting.
Tundra: I hate the looks of the Tundra but I do love the powertrain. The only reason we looked is because of the powertrain reliability. The interior of the 1794 felt high-quality, up there with the GMC/Ford. It was quiet, drove nice. For the price, however; it was lacking features...but I was willing to give those up if it meant less cost-cutting took place on the rest of the truck. At the end of the day, a very good truck all around...but it's definitely behind the rest of the pack in terms of performance, looks...but dependability wise...it's probably one of the best...and fully loaded, one of the most expensive with the least amount of feature bang for your buck.
Needless to say, we ended up with a 2016 F-150 Platinum (not the one I test drove) because it was the best all-around package. The 5.0 feels like a solid motor...I'll get to this in a second...the truck looks amazing, the features are there, it drives just right, sounds just right, and we got the right price for it as well. To be honest, if the Tundra had a tougher look...we probably would have bought the Tundra. The GMC next...the RAM last. The RAM drives nice...but each airbag costs 1000 to replace when it goes. The extended warranty price was insane...almost 5K...which tells me reliability still isn't there. The GMC was just lacking a certain spirit about it...it's hard to explain.
Lastly, the Ford's rear seat is in a league of its own. Not a single one of them had the space of a Ford.
This is obviously just my opinion, but despite the issues I had with my previous 5.0L, I still feel that this engine combined with this truck leads to one of the best all around packages the light-duty truck industry has seen. Despite all the issues we've had...every single one of the trucks I listed have their problems too...even the Tundra. If you don't believe me, go look at their forums. Forums have a way of enlightening consumers in more ways than any other type of media...and while that is a good thing, sometimes it can really suck as well. Ignorance is bliss.
With 200 miles on my truck...I might be eating my words down the road, but I think that can be said for any truck available today. They are trying to do WAY more with far less...it's just natural that quality will deteriorate.
Last edited by gopherman; 03-15-2016 at 01:00 PM.
The following users liked this post:
strorg (03-15-2016)
03-15-2016, 12:43 PM
#98
03-15-2016, 12:59 PM
#99
