Ganginwood

I'm considering purchasing 2010 with 70k. I took it for a ride and it was solid. Mileage for the year seems low too. However, it has the rocker panel rust issue, there is some rust on the bottom of the front door(s) and it has the leak in the back by the window. The leak, from what I've read is an easy fix, most likely the 3rd brake light and the dealer is telling me he will replace the rocker panels and take care of the door.

My question is, should I even consider the vehicle even though the rest of it is in good shape, it is still tight and has low miles? Or, should I consider one with no rust and 120K miles? Locally, they are both about the same price I'm also assuming I will have a timing chain replacement at 100k, is that correct? I might make another thread for that question. Thanks for the advice....

Trio

NO RUST, all day long. The extra 50k is nothing compared to the rust issues. That said a couple of other thoughts. If both trucks are local to you, and one has visible body rust, then it is highly likely both of them have significant frame / undercarriage rust. Just as bad. Usually body rust is cosmetic, but frame rust could be structural, and at a minimum a PITA come maintenance and repair time.

Also, do you have the budget to step up from the 5.4L? Could also avoid the potential (not all trucks though) for timing issues.

These are just my opinions. The interwebs are overrun with random guys with opinions. Good luck with the purchase, keep us posted.

jeffinthebag

The one with 120,000 could already have internal rust that just didn't show through yet. It's all a crap shoot.

Trio

Not if you buy vehicles that have spent their life in non-salt states. I will only by from places like southern Colorado, AZ, NM, South TX, etc. California, etc. I used to live in the East and can't believe what I used to put up with regarding rust. Fly and drive. Well worth the $200 air fare, plus make it an adventure to drive it back.

[F2C]MaDMaXX

Yeah, if finances allow, i would step up to a 2011 or higher. But no rust is going to be better than rust that's fixed.

SALEEN961

iTrader: (1)

Agreed, rust should be avoided like the plague. It always winds up being ten times worse than it looks once you start sanding and see how far it reaches underneath the paint that still looks fine. I'd much rather replace a transmission or an engine instead of door skins and rocker panels. Bolt-on body parts that are easily replaced like bumpers and hoods are one thing, but I wouldn't buy a truck if I was planning on having to cut out rockers and weld new ones in. After it's fixed, chances are that truck will be rusting through in couple a new spots a couple years down the road, especially if the dealer is fixing it to sell it.

Ganginwood

2011's don't rust? Is that the year they went aluminum?

[F2C]MaDMaXX

Sorry, they were unrelated sentences.

2011+ were the new engines, the old 5.4 is a comparative disaster of an engine in old age, especially when it's used/unknown history.

2015+ went aluminium, but they're very likely out of budget, i know they were for me. Still, no rust is still better than repaired rust.