Buying a 2015 truck, need advice

[snoop101]

Good morning all

I have posted a couple of threads about trading in, but now we are getting more serious about buying.

With that said I have a few questions.

Is there a good sales person/dealer in Calgary that wont give me the run around? I test drove a 2015 Ford 3.5 eccoboost lariat in Cochrane and I do like it, though I was hoping to get a 2.7 eccoboost as I drive to Calgary daily. One thing I liked about Cochrane Ford was the sales guy was very straight with me and was not afraid to show numbers.

I'm thinking of test driving a Dodge 1500. I love the interior, but i'm afraid that the hemi is going to cost me a lot in gas. Though the 8 speed tranny might help. Honestly I find Cochrane Dodge not trustworthy. Is there a good dealer or sales person in Calgary that will be straight up with me?

GMC and Toyota are others that I think I should atleast test drive. My only concern is they seem to both have huge engines. Also I find the Ford very "techy" and Toyota seems bland when it comes to technology. Haven't even looked at a GMC yet though.

My trade in at Cochrane was not what I was looking for, but those numbers can change. I'm going to have both vehicle trade in values done in Calgary as they might be able to provide better results.

Last but not least, financing. Ford has 0.9% over 84 months which is very nice. Dodge has decent financing and can be put over 96 months at $2.99. Not sure how GMC and Toyota is though.

Thank you in advance and any comments are appreciated.

[93VR6]

I have driven both a 2013 3.5 ecoboost and a 2014 ram with the 8 speed from Calgary to Grand Prairie numerous times, I averaged 13.5L/100 in the ecoboost and 11.5L/100 in the ram, this was travelling at 115-120 90% of the time. I was extremely disappointed with the ecoboost.

[snoop101]

Originally posted by 93VR6
I have driven both a 2013 3.5 ecoboost and a 2014 ram with the 8 speed from Calgary to Grand Prairie numerous times, I averaged 13.5L/100 in the ecoboost and 11.5L/100 in the ram, this was travelling at 115-120 90% of the time. I was extremely disappointed with the ecoboost.

It's funny you say that because I was reading somewhere that the 3.5 eccoboost fuel economy that Ford puts out is no where near what the actual amount is.

[ExtraSlow]

I own a 2012 3.5L ecoboost, and I have heard from lots of folks that they are dissapointed in the economy from that engine. I don't understand that attitude, I get between 11 and 12 l/100km on the highway. When I'm towing, that thing KILLS the 5.4L V8 I had previously.

As for prices and such, do yourself a favour, and buy the carcostcanada report for the truck you decide to deal on. So much good info on that thing.

The Ram with the 8 speed is a sweet powertrain.

[corsvette]

Don't rule out the other trucks just because of the bigger engines. The GM's get better fuel economy than most ecoboost Fords, especially on the highway.

Look up Fuelly.com, thousands of truck owners reporting their mileage there.

[redblack]

I bought my 2014 ram sport from airdrie dodge, they offered the best price at the time out of all the calgary dealerships.

I've heard on this forum that guys were getting fully loaded sports for well under 40k all in, I'm not sure which dealers were those though.

[revelations]

I would strongly consider flying or driving well outside Calgary - if you can knock $5-10,000 off the best price in the City it would be well worth it IMO to pay for a 300$ flight and hotel. :dunno:

[Masked Bandit]

I've bought Dodge product from Cochrane Dodge & Tower Chrysler in the last three years and I wouldn't set foot on either property again. Airdrie Dodge seems to have a pretty good reputation.

You should ask Cos what he thinks of his Eco-Boom motor.

If you're concerned about fuel economy you'll need to pay attention which gearing you end up with as that can have a significant impact. If you're not towing you don't need the tow gears.

[snoop101]

Originally posted by revelations
I would strongly consider flying or driving well outside Calgary - if you can knock $5-10,000 off the best price in the City it would be well worth it IMO to pay for a 300$ flight and hotel. :dunno:

I would, but we are trading in our two vehicles so that's not an option.

I'm hoping I will get a better trade in deal here in Calgary than going else where.

Honestly if I didn't care about finance or trade in I would go down to the US.

[snoop101]

Originally posted by Masked Bandit
I've bought Dodge product from Cochrane Dodge & Tower Chrysler in the last three years and I wouldn't set foot on either property again. Airdrie Dodge seems to have a pretty good reputation.

You should ask Cos what he thinks of his Eco-Boom motor.

If you're concerned about fuel economy you'll need to pay attention which gearing you end up with as that can have a significant impact. If you're not towing you don't need the tow gears.

Ya I could see myself pulling a small vacation trailer, but nothing too big.

I too have heard good things about Airdrie Dodge. If anyone has a sales person they know there that is good please let me know.

[redblack]

Originally posted by snoop101


Ya I could see myself pulling a small vacation trailer, but nothing too big.

I too have heard good things about Airdrie Dodge. If anyone has a sales person they know there that is good please let me know.

3.21 gears should be all you need then. Mine has the 3.92 because I was going to buy a large travel trailer.

I used Sean miles at airdrie dodge and he did not try to pull any crap like the other dealers salesmen did.

[carson blocks]

Originally posted by redblack


3.21 gears should be all you need then. Mine has the 3.92 because I was going to buy a large travel trailer.


I picked 3.92s on the new one because I don't like slow trucks, and because fuel mileage is for pussies. May regret it, but oh well.

P.S. Check your PMs, Snoop. Hooked you up with a good deal..

[spike98]

Stay away from Cochrane Dodge at all cost. They tried a bait and switch with me when i bought from them.

[Aleks]

I have the Tundra. It's not the best of gas, but from what I've seen online the best case scenario for a gas truck I could get may 2L/100kms better in the other trucks which at 20,000kms per year works out to about $400-$450 in savings. I think it's worse on gas due to 6 speed auto and 4.30 rear. That's the only one you can get in the Crewmax. I don't think anyone else even offers that as an option?

I love leasing vehicles and Toyota was by far the cheapest to lease at the time. Combination of high residual and low interest rate, made it around $100-$200 less per month.

[r3ccOs]

Originally posted by carson blocks


I picked 3.92s on the new one because I don't like slow trucks, and because fuel mileage is for pussies. May regret it, but oh well.

P.S. Check your PMs, Snoop. Hooked you up with a good deal..

love it... and you would think the 8 speed would be able to make up the difference, but the gearing is the same regardless of the 3.91 or the 3.21

all the people I know who complain about the ecoboost's fuel economy are using the tow/max tow package, which is anywhere from 3.55 to 4.10 (with the HD)

same goes with people who complain about the Ram's hemi's fuel economy on the highway using the 3.92

Out of all the trucks, Fuel economy comes at a sacrifice certainly, but I'd probably rank them this way:

GMC/Cheby 5.3
Ram Hemi
Ford Ecoboost
Tundra

on the highway the Hemi with the 3.21 has staggering fuel economy, but in the City, its a PIG and may be a bit better with the 3.92.

My ecoscrew with 3.73 is probably 1.5 l/100 worse on the highway, but around the city I can average 12.7 with stock tires, and about 13.3 with the up sized tires.

[Cos]

.

[Sorath]

Originally posted by snoop101


It's funny you say that because I was reading somewhere that the 3.5 eccoboost fuel economy that Ford puts out is no where near what the actual amount is.

something to consider. the 2015+ f150 is also aluminum body. this would better better on gas :dunno:

Then also i dont know if you like aluminum trucks or not

[snoop101]

I just finished looking at a Chevy Silverado LTZ with the 6.2l and 8 speed transmission. I didn't have time to test drive it though.

The interior has a much nicer finish then the Ford. Makes the Ford feel cheap.

Going to test drive it tomorrow and see if the wife likes it.

[Aleks]

Originally posted by Cos


Go with the Ram. Better on fuel than my EB (usually 16l/100km + and premium). Worse fuel economy while towing. Terrible reliability (not sure difference to Dodge).

If I had the money I would go GM first, but for price/reliability I'd get a Ram or maybe even a Japanese truck.



Fuck how? I drive 3.5km to work and back in my truck. I drove from my house, filled up, drove to the office, and drove home today. I think I am at 20 L/100km.

Ill go and grab some pictures from my dash

3.5kms is your problem I think. That's way too short of a commute for the truck to be warmed up and operating efficiently. Our van has the same issue, most of its trips are very short, and you can see it's sitting at 14.1L/100kms life time. Short trips are a fuel econ killer especially in winter.

[colinxx235]

I'm surprised so many of the guys on here buy the Ford eco after having driven one a few times recently.

That turbo spooling is so painful to listen to all the time... I wanted to drive our construction managers truck off the road after just a few minutes.
I would take the Chevy/GM over it any day.

Family member has the brand new Ram 1500, quite enjoyed the ride, would also take over the ford eco :poosie:

[Cos]

.

[r3ccOs]

Originally posted by Cos


Even then, driving from Airdrie to the farm near Strathmore only nets me 13 L/100km give or take. So not any better than the RAM. Honestly most of the time I get about the same mileage as I did with my 5.4L with the 4-Speed. Quite disappointed.

The biggest difference is that my towing ability is improved for the same mileage. I do like the wall of torque for towing the trailer, doesn't scream like the old 5.4L did. However towing my trailer from Airdrie to Riverhurt Sk and back I averaged 29L/100km in the EB. My trailer is only a 4800# 24' unit.

Video of fuel proof here.

Screen 1 is current tank
Screen 2 is current oil change
fuel economy screen is since they put the new motor in.

WNjAcjD6hyw

I really don't know...

I get up to 15 in the winter, but in the summer/fall I can tick away in the mid 13's...

of all the truck engines, I think the Eco tows the best, but the Hemi is the class leader, even IMO when compared to the 6.2 from Ford or GM.

The 6.2 in the GM is a beast, but I dunno... the Hemi seems to really have as much go, is better on gas, and also has a proven track record.

[HiTempguy1]

The 6.2L also requires premium no?

If you are looking for honest, real world towing reviews, TFLTruck on the youtubes is swell. The guys are pretty muppety, but the info and testing is relatively solid and gives you a good overall idea of what you are looking at.

[Darkane]

Best compromise is the GM 5.3.

I have a '15 Sierra and do 10.5-11l/100km if I drive at 110. I have the 3.42 rear end. It's the best of the three for fuel economy. That said, it's also the least powerful but not that heavy.

Give it a drive. The 6.2 with the 8sp you'll see roughly 12l/100km and the power will blow you away.

[Aleks]

Here's some bench racing stats: Again Axle ratios vary widely on these trucks but they are listed in the table. Ram Hemi is the slowest here. 6.2L is very impressive and it even used regular gas while Ford uses premium and Ram midgrade.

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2015-chevrolet-silverado-vs-2015-ford-f-150-2015-ram-1500-2014-toyota-tundra-comparison-test-2015-ford-f-150-vs-2015-chevrolet-silverado-1500-2015-ram-1500-2014-toyota-tundra-final-scoring-performance-data-and-complete-specs-page-6

[Disoblige]

Friends of mine have the 6.2 L 8 speed Sierra (All Terrain), it's definitely nice.

Good power, nice interior, looks good. If I was a truck person, I'd get that truck.

[KPHMPH]

I have a 6.2 / 8 speed in my Caddy and it averages 11 / 100km on the highway and 15 / 100km in the city.

Power band is awesome too!

I had an eco boost ( 13' ) before this and actually didn't mind it but also didn't get MPGs I wanted. I like both trucks but prefer the caddy now.

[Go4Long]

I love my Ram Hemi. I just bought my second one (replaced a 2013 quad cab with a 2015 Crew Cab). I live in Didsbury and commute to Red Deer, in the old truck I had a 3.21 (I think) rear end and got mid 11 L/100km rating...with the new one it is a different rear end (3.92) and I'm around the low 13's to mid 12's (sometimes more if the wind sucks)...it's a little faster according to the butt dyno, but really, it's a truck.

FWIW...best I ever saw in the old truck was 10.4 avg L/100km on my way back from Vancouver...new truck is still breaking in.

[snoop101]

Originally posted by Darkane
Best compromise is the GM 5.3.

I have a '15 Sierra and do 10.5-11l/100km if I drive at 110. I have the 3.42 rear end. It's the best of the three for fuel economy. That said, it's also the least powerful but not that heavy.

Give it a drive. The 6.2 with the 8sp you'll see roughly 12l/100km and the power will blow you away.

ended up test driving the 5.3 because and yes this is dumb but my wife is a short ass and we need power adjusting pedals.

First impression is that the GMC felt so much better to drive. A bit tighter steering than the Ford. I found the Ford too easy. My only issue was the big front end which I like, but I dunno about the wife.

Next up is test driving a Ram 1500 Sport and see how it is. So far I know the Hemi gets a bit worse gas millage than the 5.3 in the GMC. Also GMC has 0% financing for 84 months which is really nice. The Ram does seem to have more luxury items like heated steering wheel.

[Darkane]

Originally posted by snoop101


ended up test driving the 5.3 because and yes this is dumb but my wife is a short ass and we need power adjusting pedals.

First impression is that the GMC felt so much better to drive. A bit tighter steering than the Ford. I found the Ford too easy. My only issue was the big front end which I like, but I dunno about the wife.

Next up is test driving a Ram 1500 Sport and see how it is. So far I know the Hemi gets a bit worse gas millage than the 5.3 in the GMC. Also GMC has 0% financing for 84 months which is really nice. The Ram does seem to have more luxury items like heated steering wheel.

Yeah for sure. If you package the SLT with kodiak and all terrain, you'll have all those options in the gmc. You may be able to squeak them in with the SLE, kodiak, all terrain, premium packs or what not. Should give you everything and it's the sweet spot for price because of the lower SLE starting msrp.

[Black Gts]

No mention of the Ford 5.0? I think I'mialso victim of the short commute, but city I'm 15 summer and 17/100 winter. Also is my personal math right? . My lancer was 8ish/100 so at a buck a litre it's 7bucks/100? Lol for me it's 70 bucks a month difference. You guys seem better with #s and I'm terrible with money but it seems to be 5-10 bucks per 100kms gas small car vs truck.

[InRich]

I'm also in the process of driving a truck to buy in the next 5 days or so.
first off.

RAM has like a million different options on a million different trucks. I was in there almost 4 hours today going through it all, checking out the trucks at east side dodge.
So lets get to it, and this review is coming from someone who LOVES test driving various different cars, rating and reviewing them.

2016 RAM
the RAM I got configured is almost fully loaded, leather trimmed seats, no sunroof. Crew cab, but did NOT have the option where you can move the pedals around for best comfort, something I noticed, and did not the positioning of my feet as I was driving the truck. I found breaking in the car quite uncomfortable. Unfortunately I was NOT able to find another truck, without buying a fully loaded out one to get that option, which pissed me off, and i did tell the guy that. The truck is for sure the fastest out of all the trucks I drove so far. it had a 3.92 ratio, and this is a MUST HAVE FEATURE if your buying the RAM. The dash is by far the most beautiful, the interior is VERY NICE, very conservative, and for the price, to me was fantastic. The leather wrap dash is very good looking, the seats are very comfortable. If your going to buy the RAM, the ALPINE sound system, is a MUST! the sound system in the regular setup is not good. Don't worry about gas mileage. YOUR BUYING A TRUCK! if your worried about gas millage, go buy a civic. I sat there for 4 hours today, trying to get the best truck for the best price. At the end of the day, I got mine down to $44,800 from 59,000 sticker at EAST SIDE DODGE. You CANNOT get a nicely loaded RAM for under 40k like beyonders are saying. I had one in Edmonton, nicely loaded down to 34600, but it was a REGULAR CAB, which included navi. These trucks are starting to show their age. 20 inch wheels are a must for this car, ride quality, and comfort is VERY HIGH. Truck handles excellent.

Rate the truck @ 8/10 - price, interior/exterior looks, inside quality at that price is a great bargain. This is a monster. No HID lights, or sunroof.

2015 FORD F-150 Lariat
First off I noticed this truck is very easy to get in and out of. Much better then the RAM, but my tester also came with the kick plate running board, which did not retract, as I've seen on other models, would have been nice if it did. My model was FULLY LOADED, with the panoramic sunroof (which is beautiful btw), full leather seats, and the V8 5.0 engine. The truck is a 3.21 ratio, and I defiantly noticed just how lazy the truck is compared to the RAM. On top of that, it doesn't sound good, not like a truck is supposed to. I want my truck to sound like a monster, unfortunately this is not the case with this truck, this is more like a sleeping bear. The interior in this truck is very nice, I did NOT like the fake wooden accent pieces you'll find in all Lariat Ford trucks. To me it looked cheap. The dash seemed dated to me, and overall too complex, and busy with non-sense. The Sony touch screen was nice, and overall the interior was good. The sound system in this car was junk. Reminded me of the lowest end 30k RAM I sat in earlier in the day, I did not appreciate the sound system for a truck this expensive. The truck handled, ok, ride quality was nice and sturdy, your viability in the truck is superior compared to the RAM. Truck as tested retailed for 67,000 after sitting with the manager I was able to get that down to 53,000.

Rate the truck @ 7/10 - woulda been a better rating if the truck was cheaper. Great looking exterior, LED lights look fantastic! HIDs included.

2015 GMC Silverado.
First off. I dont think this interior looks good at all. Looks cheap to me. The seats are by far the most comfortable of any of the trucks reviewed so far. The truck is VERY hard to get in and out of, because its missing the little hand grab thingy on the upper parts of the door (driver only). I have no idea why they took this away. Its going to be very hard for fat, or small people to get in and out of. The 5.3 tester I had felt lazy. Much like the Ford did, but worse. It felt like I was driving a bus, no ballz what so ever. The front lights are atrocious, did a very bad job high lighting the road, no HID option. The worst part of these trucks has to be the price, and the fact that GM won't budge much on these trucks price wise. it was the most expensive of all the trucks, and they won't give you more then 3500 dollars off the trucks, unless you wanna buy a demo. The best price I could get was on a 2015 fully loaded GMC Sierra at 43,000 DEMO which had 12,000km. The sales staff are also terrible to deal with, they don't know anything about their product. I can't justify paying 60+k for these trucks.

Rate the truck @ 6/10 - I just wouldn't buy it. ever! not with the 5.3 anyways. If your going to buy this truck, spend the extra money on a 6.2, with the 20 inch wheels. unfortunately your going to pay in the 60k+ price range. I wouldn't buy anything less then a Denali with the 22 inch rims.

2015 Tundra
DID NOT TEST DRIVE THIS TRUCK, walked away after sitting in it... I did NOT fit in it! my head was touching the top of the roof, even if the seat was fully adjusted down. My opinion is that they did a nice job on that interior though, looks like everything is high quality, the exterior is really poor in the looks department IMO. Price is high.

OK so tomorrow, I will be test driving a 3.5 ECO BOOST and I will be taking a Sierra Denali out aswell. Hope u enjoyed my review.

[never]

^ haven't ever heard of a GMC Silverado before...must be something new!

[Cos]

.

[ExtraSlow]

Let us know your opinion of the 3.5EcoBoost vs the 5.0L Ford. I know how I feel about it, but I always like to hear from folks who aren't as brand-loyal as me.

[Darell_n]

Also make sure to test drive a Chev with the 6.2, great power and great fuel economy.

[Strider]

OP, not sure if you addressed this somewhere in your other threads, but if you have 2 vehicles going down to 1, why not throw them both on here and kijiji and see which sells first (or sell both). You'll do way better than trade in value.

[CLiVE]

....I know the ecoboost gets a lot of hate on this forum.

I have a 2011 FX4 Ecoboost with max tow pkg. So far has been great, no issues whatsoever with approximately 70,000kms on it. Great power, and love the turbo spool sound.

Mileage average is around 13.5L/100 in the city, and better on the hwy. (mileage is better than the Ridgeline I had before, so good enough for me).:thumbsup:

[brucebanner]

My '13 EB with max tow treated me very well. 65k with no issues. I think I averaged 13.5 or so per 100km and I drove it pretty aggressive.

My current '15 EB doesn't have the tow package and I went with the 5.5' box instead and through 6700km I'm averaging 13/100 overall. Again, I drive this one fairly aggressive too. I've been able to get low 11/100 highway cruising. Good enough for me.

[ExtraSlow]

Originally posted by CLiVE
....I know the ecoboost gets a lot of hate on this forum.
Clearly us satisfied ecoboost owners need to be louder.

[ShermanEF9]

are you towing much OP?

Im going to board the ecoboost love train. i've been very happy with mine. i've seen fuel consumption as low as 9.8 on the highway, and usually 15s in city. it also hauls ass and cargo very well (and i have 3.31 gears). i also like how quiet it is. i don't need the v8 noises to rustle my jimmies. its just nice to drive around and not have to wind it up to get anywhere.

if you're doing minimal hauling/towing, or lighter stuff, maybe check out the 2.7 ecoboost? i drove one this summer and fell in love. it simply goes. it felt like it had a bit more pickup than the 3.5, but obviously a bit slower. also managed to get in the 11s in city and low 9s on the highway.

at the end of the day, go test drive a bunch and see what you like. we can only provide personal experiences and advice.

[CompletelyNumb]

My ecoboost got around 10L/100km on the highway and averaged 14L/100km in the city.

Last winter however I did notice that it dropped substantially to about 18 in the city and 15 on the highway. I blame winter fuel (even though I was filling premium that apparently didnt have added ethanol)

[Twin_Cam_Turbo]

My Tacoma gets worse fuel economy then most of the trucks :(

[dirtsniffer]

You're perfect for the RAM inrich.

[CLiVE]

Originally posted by Twin_Cam_Turbo
My Tacoma gets worse fuel economy then most of the trucks :(

This. They've all come a long ways since 2005. Don't worry about it.
Any of the trucks discussed will meet your needs, drive them all and buy which one you like best, and/or has the best incentives at the time.

[snoop101]

Ok so i'm pretty much done test driving trucks except I really wanted to test drive the new Ford 2.7 eccoboost. Cochrane Ford does not have one, but there is one in Airdrie. They were closed today :(

Here is what I feel so far.

Look: Ford and dodge are the best looks so far with Dodge coming in 1st, but by a hair. Toyota Tundras actually have a decent look.GMC Sierra looks good, but the wife hates how bulky it looks.

Interior: Dodge wins by a long shot with nice leather and wood trim, everything from heated/cooled seats to heated steering wheel. Ford I like the room and the placement of things, but find it a bit too cheap(even in the lariat). GMC seemed middle of the road. Toyota I drove was the platinum 1794 edition and was actually amazed on how it looked. My only issues was some of the placement of controls were hidden and hard to find. Also a small thing, but my wife is short and the Tundra doesent have adjustable pedals.

Steering: Dodge seemed to be the biggest winner here. Tundra came in 2nd with Ford being way to loose. GMC sierra was an odd one, though I liked the feeling I found it to be big feeling. Making tight turns felt big.

Power: Dodge and Ford seemed very similar. Oddly enough I found the GMC and Toyota to not have the pep and kinda blah. Which is odd because Dodge doesn't have the best 0-60 times.

Price: This is an odd one. Ford seems to have the highest prices, but then the biggest discounts. Ford also has good financing. GMC has good financing and pretty good prices. Dodge i'm not 100% sure yet because other than the sticker being $60k and change I really have no idea what he can do on it. Toyota was hard to compare. On all other trucks I looked at 2015 which have good incentives, though here at Cochrane Toyota they have no 2015 left and he advised they can only go by what is listed online for the 2016. Toyota does have nice 2.4% over 84 months.

Fuel economy: If I can get a 2015 2.7 eccoboost I think I would go with Ford. The 3.5 i'm still on the fence. GMC 5.3 sierra seems decent and would get the same as the Hemi. Toyota I got to look into more, but so far what I have been reading is that they are very horrible.

Overall: Dodge seems like what we want in a truck, though pricing I have no idea yet. Ford is a bit higher price and they honestly gave me crappy trade in value which I think is because they made the Truck a discount good (so they made up for it). GMC i'm afraid the wife will think its too big. Toyota has some strengths, but the weakness's are just to high.

Places I have dealt with:
Dodge- We traveled to Airdrie for their reputation. So far the sales guy was nice, but will see when negotiation starts. The one here in Cochrane is beyond horrible.

Ford- Cochrane Ford the guys are pretty straight up which I do like. Have not dealt with any other ford.

GMC- My coworker knows a guys at Jack Carter and so far he has been very good and straight up with me.

Toyota- Cochrane Toyota was the only one and talked to today. Seemed straight and non pushy.

Notes: I can never see myself towing anything other than a small boat or a smaller camping trailer.

With trading in two vehicles and having around the $15-$20 thousand in negative equity makes getting the best incentive and financing critical.

After driving all those Trucks I can pretty much name all the features that I would need and not need. which is nice, because going in I was not to sure what is important.

[r3ccOs]

Originally posted by snoop101
Ok so i'm pretty much done test driving trucks except I really wanted to test drive the new Ford 2.7 eccoboost. Cochrane Ford does not have one, but there is one in Airdrie. They were closed today :(

Here is what I feel so far.

Look: Ford and dodge are the best looks so far with Dodge coming in 1st, but by a hair. Toyota Tundras actually have a decent look.GMC Sierra looks good, but the wife hates how bulky it looks.

Interior: Dodge wins by a long shot with nice leather and wood trim, everything from heated/cooled seats to heated steering wheel. Ford I like the room and the placement of things, but find it a bit too cheap(even in the lariat). GMC seemed middle of the road. Toyota I drove was the platinum 1794 edition and was actually amazed on how it looked. My only issues was some of the placement of controls were hidden and hard to find. Also a small thing, but my wife is short and the Tundra doesent have adjustable pedals.

Steering: Dodge seemed to be the biggest winner here. Tundra came in 2nd with Ford being way to loose. GMC sierra was an odd one, though I liked the feeling I found it to be big feeling. Making tight turns felt big.

Power: Dodge and Ford seemed very similar. Oddly enough I found the GMC and Toyota to not have the pep and kinda blah. Which is odd because Dodge doesn't have the best 0-60 times.

Price: This is an odd one. Ford seems to have the highest prices, but then the biggest discounts. Ford also has good financing. GMC has good financing and pretty good prices. Dodge i'm not 100% sure yet because other than the sticker being $60k and change I really have no idea what he can do on it. Toyota was hard to compare. On all other trucks I looked at 2015 which have good incentives, though here at Cochrane Toyota they have no 2015 left and he advised they can only go by what is listed online for the 2016. Toyota does have nice 2.4% over 84 months.

Fuel economy: If I can get a 2015 2.7 eccoboost I think I would go with Ford. The 3.5 i'm still on the fence. GMC 5.3 sierra seems decent and would get the same as the Hemi. Toyota I got to look into more, but so far what I have been reading is that they are very horrible.

Overall: Dodge seems like what we want in a truck, though pricing I have no idea yet. Ford is a bit higher price and they honestly gave me crappy trade in value which I think is because they made the Truck a discount good (so they made up for it). GMC i'm afraid the wife will think its too big. Toyota has some strengths, but the weakness's are just to high.

Places I have dealt with:
Dodge- We traveled to Airdrie for their reputation. So far the sales guy was nice, but will see when negotiation starts. The one here in Cochrane is beyond horrible.

Ford- Cochrane Ford the guys are pretty straight up which I do like. Have not dealt with any other ford.

GMC- My coworker knows a guys at Jack Carter and so far he has been very good and straight up with me.

Toyota- Cochrane Toyota was the only one and talked to today. Seemed straight and non pushy.

Notes: I can never see myself towing anything other than a small boat or a smaller camping trailer.

With trading in two vehicles and having around the $15-$20 thousand in negative equity makes getting the best incentive and financing critical.

After driving all those Trucks I can pretty much name all the features that I would need and not need. which is nice, because going in I was not to sure what is important.

what is your criteria with owning a half ton, and based on situation as aforementioned, I'm just not certain its prudent to pursue a new vehicle?

I mean yes, a Taco or even the new Canyon aren't much far off in fuel economy or price... but if you aren't using it as a truck, you may be better off buying a used SUV to fit your bill and use case.

My neighbor picked up a low k 2013 tahoe for a steal...

out of all the half ton trucks, I'd say that from a driveability perspective that the Ram and the Titan drove the best.
For some reason, even though the Ram, Tundra, F150 etc.. have way more engine than the Titan, the Titan seemed to haul ass and feel the most nimble, even more like a smaller truck.

speed wise, the Ram and the F150 are rockets... sub 6 second 0-60 in a 5000+ lbs crew cab half ton is stupid quick.

Out of interior quality, the higher trim package Ram's are the "best", however in the mid trim level, its really all flip of a coin...
that being said, the interior space of the GMC and Ram are limited compared to the Titan and F150

Now, if you are trying to use a half ton to perform duty, it is based on tow packages and stats, and if you are talking about doing a bit of 3/4 ton towing, or high payload, you are really looking at only the F150 3.5 ecoboost and Chev/GMC 6.2

I went with a 2014 F150 w/ Max tow, so I can stay within range when occasionally towing my 32 foot bumper pull, and I love the flat floor and rear leg room.


from a post purchase support perspective, in general Ford, Ram and Chevy are going to suck, its just who sucks less.

Toyota, at least south point, seems to be pretty good...

from a fuel economics point of view, outside of the thirsty Titan, you are splitting hairs. Yes the fuel consumption isn't "great", it is still substantially better than what the last generation of half tons were, and yet offer so much more performance and capability.

if you aren't towing heavy and want a good value, I just don't think anything can touch a Ram Hemi.

[ShermanEF9]

if you're worried about fuel economy that much that a L/100 either way is an arguing point, a truck is not for you.

[r3ccOs]

Originally posted by ShermanEF9
if you're worried about fuel economy that much that a L/100 either way is an arguing point, a truck is not for you.

QFT

[snoop101]

Originally posted by ShermanEF9
if you're worried about fuel economy that much that a L/100 either way is an arguing point, a truck is not for you.

I'm not worried to the point that I would never get a hemi because of the fuel economy. I'm actually considering that as an option. My way of looking at it is that its 2015 and engines like the 2.7 eccoboost are the future. It can tow anything that I would think about towing ie: a small camper trailer or a boat.

I drive from Cochrane to Calgary daily and something like a Tundra with a 6 speed matched to a big sluggish V8 isn't something I would do.

[ShermanEF9]

oh ok. i kinda scanned and thought that fuel economy was a sticking point. and i agree with you. the 2.7 is a neat engine, as is the 3.5. but the best plan is to drive them all and choose what you like. just remember with the ecoboosts you need to learn how to drive them to get the fuel economy. if you drive them like a dickbag, the economy will be poo.

[SkiBum5.0]

Financials are none of my business but if you roll $15K, plus finance at 84 months, you are in for a heap of trouble if you need to sell that truck (especially the Dodge). You are going to be upside down $25K the moment you drive off. Might be closer to $30 depending on what they give you on trade.

[carson blocks]

Originally posted by SkiBum5.0
Financials are none of my business but if you roll $15K, plus finance at 84 months, you are in for a heap of trouble if you need to sell that truck (especially the Dodge). You are going to be upside down $25K the moment you drive off. Might be closer to $30 depending on what they give you on trade.

Word. Rolling in negative equity is a dangerous game. It starts a bad cycle with more and more negative equity on each trade-in, especially if you're financing over the max term. My personal opinion is that if you can't at least bring yourself to at LEAST a 0 equity position on the old vehicle, you have absolutely no business shopping for a new one, and if you can't afford it financed over 60 months MAX, you simply can't afford it.

[bjstare]

To continue with the derail...

why the fuck would anyone with negative equity be shopping for a brand new vehicle that's going to depreciate like crazy?

Oh yeah, gotta have that new hotness, forgot about that. Can't consider picking up something thats ten years old for a fraction of the price, the neighbours would laugh you off the block.:drama:

[snoop101]

Originally posted by cjblair
To continue with the derail...

why the fuck would anyone with negative equity be shopping for a brand new vehicle that's going to depreciate like crazy?

Oh yeah, gotta have that new hotness, forgot about that. Can't consider picking up something thats ten years old for a fraction of the price, the neighbours would laugh you off the block.:drama:

Actually there is many reasons. Warranty, fuel efficiency, safety (and don't mean crash tests, but also backup camera, sensors), financing rates (at zero % it means not paying extra), and finally with 2015's on the way out you can get great deals right now.

[never]

Originally posted by snoop101


Actually there is many reasons. Warranty, fuel efficiency, safety (and don't mean crash tests, but also backup camera, sensors), financing rates (at zero % it means not paying extra), and finally with 2015's on the way out you can get great deals right now.

Hahaha, great logic!

[bjstare]

Originally posted by snoop101


Actually there is many reasons. Warranty, fuel efficiency, safety (and don't mean crash tests, but also backup camera, sensors), financing rates (at zero % it means not paying extra), and finally with 2015's on the way out you can get great deals right now.

I've never owned a new car, never needed warranty, and never been hurt in accidents. Aftermarket backup cameras are super cheap. 0% financing isn't actually a deal, it's often rolled into the overall price, it's not like dealerships are actually out there to make sure you get the best deal. Oh yeah, you can buy a shitload of fuel with the 5-10k per year depreciation you're getting bent on, so fuel economy is really a moot point. Did I miss anything?

None of those are good enough reasons to snowball your debt. But hey, that's just my opinion. I'll excuse myself now. :rolleyes:

[ExtraSlow]

cjblair, this is a CAR forum, not a finance forum, take your insane focus on smart budgeting elsewhere!

[JRSC00LUDE]

Buy one with steel bumpers, these plastic ones keep breaking! :nut:

[Aleks]

Originally posted by r3ccOs


speed wise, the Ram and the F150 are rockets... sub 6 second 0-60 in a 5000+ lbs crew cab half ton is stupid quick.



Was bored so I looked this up. Someone mentioned TFL truck guys. They tested the Ram 5.7, 3.92, Ford 3.5 Ecoboost, 3.73 and Tundra 5.7, 4.30. Test was done at 1mile ASL so similar to Calgary DA on a summer day. Nowhere near 6 seconds. But rest of results are interesting.

0-60:
Ford 7.99
Ram 8.34
Tundra 9.13

0-60 with boat:
Ford 15.56
Ram 16.64
Tundra 17.36

A15hc9DtdQI

[r3ccOs]

Originally posted by snoop101


Actually there is many reasons. Warranty, fuel efficiency, safety (and don't mean crash tests, but also backup camera, sensors), financing rates (at zero % it means not paying extra), and finally with 2015's on the way out you can get great deals right now.

you know what... that's what I did, but I didn't have negative equity and pretty much paid cash for the truck.

you're talking about Laramie interiors and shit... and I can see how you could think:
"well if I get enough of a discount and good financing, that will offset my 15k of negative equity" you are just lying to yourself

Its like my buddy's wife who justified a "new" car, just because the financing was 84 months 0% (Mazda), meanwhile the cash pricing was a 6k discount...

WHEN they needed to liquidate less than 8 months later, she as "pissed" at how much the car had depreciated...

I was like, how stupid... you already know out of the gate that the car was already 6k off your purchase price + depreciation.

don't get in the same boat, private sell your cars if you have to, and if you need, buy something used and reliable.

all the trucks are all good, and come in all sorts of configurations... they are all truck like... they haul like a truck, they drive like a truck, and drink gas like a truck

if you don't need a truck don't buy one... and if you do, then buy one

[audimaniaR8]

Alright, since this thread has gone 3 pages with zero real world experience given about the 2015 trucks with the 2.7 ecoboost, I better weigh in.

2015 2.7 ecoboost, 4x4, 3.73 ratio

So far the truck gets exactly what it is rated for, 10.4l/100k. That's at 100km/h on cruise control on a regular road with a mix of hills and flat areas.
It will get under 10 on a super flat road. I'd expect the 3.31&3.55 trucks to get their rated as well.

On the other end of the spectrum I recently did an ~800km trip, generally driving like a dick, 120-130km/h the whole way, full throttle passing. Not attempting to get good mileage in any way, and averaged 13l/100km.

Haven't really done much city driving with it yet, so not sure on mileage, but the stopstart system seems to work okay, can start up and get on the throttle relatively quick.

The 2.7 is not lacking for power in any way either. haven't been in any situation where i found it underpowered.

Oh, and don't write off the 2.7's reliability because of the early 3.5s being crap. They share very little with eachother so its not a good indicator. Not saying it will be problem free, but it hasn't been out long enough to know yet.

[snoop101]

Originally posted by audimaniaR8
Alright, since this thread has gone 3 pages with zero real world experience given about the 2015 trucks with the 2.7 ecoboost, I better weigh in.

2015 2.7 ecoboost, 4x4, 3.73 ratio

So far the truck gets exactly what it is rated for, 10.4l/100k. That's at 100km/h on cruise control on a regular road with a mix of hills and flat areas.
It will get under 10 on a super flat road. I'd expect the 3.31&3.55 trucks to get their rated as well.

On the other end of the spectrum I recently did an ~800km trip, generally driving like a dick, 120-130km/h the whole way, full throttle passing. Not attempting to get good mileage in any way, and averaged 13l/100km.

Haven't really done much city driving with it yet, so not sure on mileage, but the stopstart system seems to work okay, can start up and get on the throttle relatively quick.

The 2.7 is not lacking for power in any way either. haven't been in any situation where i found it underpowered.

Oh, and don't write off the 2.7's reliability because of the early 3.5s being crap. They share very little with eachother so its not a good indicator. Not saying it will be problem free, but it hasn't been out long enough to know yet.

Thank you, this is exactly what I have been looking for.

[ShermanEF9]

Originally posted by audimaniaR8
Alright, since this thread has gone 3 pages with zero real world experience given about the 2015 trucks with the 2.7 ecoboost, I better weigh in.

2015 2.7 ecoboost, 4x4, 3.73 ratio

So far the truck gets exactly what it is rated for, 10.4l/100k. That's at 100km/h on cruise control on a regular road with a mix of hills and flat areas.
It will get under 10 on a super flat road. I'd expect the 3.31&3.55 trucks to get their rated as well.

On the other end of the spectrum I recently did an ~800km trip, generally driving like a dick, 120-130km/h the whole way, full throttle passing. Not attempting to get good mileage in any way, and averaged 13l/100km.

Haven't really done much city driving with it yet, so not sure on mileage, but the stopstart system seems to work okay, can start up and get on the throttle relatively quick.

The 2.7 is not lacking for power in any way either. haven't been in any situation where i found it underpowered.

Oh, and don't write off the 2.7's reliability because of the early 3.5s being crap. They share very little with eachother so its not a good indicator. Not saying it will be problem free, but it hasn't been out long enough to know yet.

Thanks for the feedback. i am really considering a 2.7 for my next truck as i do not need 11000+ lbs of towing.

[Cos]

.

[OU812]

I would look at F150 forums for a more balanced overview.

[Cos]

.

[ExtraSlow]

Have heard awesome things about the 2.7, apparently feels as fast as the 3.5 in the last generation when empty. The start\stop annoys the good old boys though.

[Cos]

.

[ExtraSlow]

Cos, if I was only using the truck for towing, I would get a used 3/4 ton truck. Gas engine for lower maintenence and purchase cost. Even with your relatively small trailer, a heavier truck will feel nicer with a load. Plus, can get a longer bed, which is handy for "trucky" things.

[Cos]

.

[ExtraSlow]

It's pretty nice to daily drive a reasonable car that is a little more fun in traffic, and parking lots, compared to some compromise truck every single day.

[94boosted]

I just picked up a 2015 Sierra SLT All Terrain w/ 5.3 & 3.42 Axle Ratio and I absolutely love it. I got just shy of 10K off with corporate pricing and 0% financing for 84mo making it a great deal.

I had spent a lot of time researching & comparing the other big 3 and in my opinion here are the pro's/con's for each.

15' F150 Lariat w/ 3.5EB
- Interior looks like it will become dated very quickly, cabin felt dark and cramped with a huge A-Pillar
- The 3.5EB is definitely more powerful than the GM 5.3 but not as substantial of a difference as I was hoping for especially considering its need for premium fuel to make max power
- By far the most expensive when comparing apples to apples
- Even with its aluminum body the weight savings over the GMC w/ 5.3 are minimal

15' Ram Sport Loaded w/ Hemi
- Very nice interior
- Exterior looks dated
- The service at Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep is an exercise in frustration

15' Tundra Limited
- What a joke, interior looks like it was plucked from 2009
- The worst gas mileage of the bunch
- More powerful on paper than GM 5.3 but the butt dyno proves otherwise


Originally posted by Darkane
Best compromise is the GM 5.3.

I have a '15 Sierra and do 10.5-11l/100km if I drive at 110. I have the 3.42 rear end. It's the best of the three for fuel economy. That said, it's also the least powerful but not that heavy.



Finally a car err truck you and I can agree on ;)

[Cos]

.

[94boosted]

Originally posted by Cos


Yeah I was at GM for a few hours last night. Got to take an Avalanche home. Priced out a $15 with -9100 off (how did you manage both the stack discount and the 0 percent, they told me either or).

Going to look at a 2014 Blue used with 25,000km on it after work.

I didn't know they made 2015 Avalanche's :confused:

I have preferred pricing, if I chose to finance it through my own bank the total discount would have been closer to 13.25K.

[r3ccOs]

Originally posted by 94boosted
I just picked up a 2015 Sierra SLT All Terrain w/ 5.3 & 3.42 Axle Ratio and I absolutely love it. I got just shy of 10K off with corporate pricing and 0% financing for 84mo making it a great deal.

I had spent a lot of time researching & comparing the other big 3 and in my opinion here are the pro's/con's for each.

15' F150 Lariat w/ 3.5EB
- Interior looks like it will become dated very quickly, cabin felt dark and cramped with a huge A-Pillar
- The 3.5EB is definitely more powerful than the GM 5.3 but not as substantial of a difference as I was hoping for especially considering its need for premium fuel to make max power
- By far the most expensive when comparing apples to apples
- Even with its aluminum body the weight savings over the GMC w/ 5.3 are minimal

15' Ram Sport Loaded w/ Hemi
- Very nice interior
- Exterior looks dated
- The service at Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep is an exercise in frustration

15' Tundra Limited
- What a joke, interior looks like it was plucked from 2009
- The worst gas mileage of the bunch
- More powerful on paper than GM 5.3 but the butt dyno proves otherwise



Finally a car err truck you and I can agree on ;)

The only thing going for the Tundra is its exterior...

Its not class leading anywhere and my mechanic has said he's seen alot of drivetrain issues

its funny, he says that American half ton trucks have mediocre engines, which mostly seems to be due to the relentless search of the non-existent fuel economy savings, but have the most "durable" drive train as it takes on much of the modular benefits of being built in the same factory and parts sourced from the OEs as their HD brethren.

he has said that the Tundra 5.7 has a bullet proof engine, and the Titan isn't bad (or the QX56/Armada) but has had to replace a number of rear ends, lots of wheel hop in the leaf, and transfer case problems.

his example was that the Ford 6 speed 6R80 (though not smooth) is stupid tough when compared to whats in the Titan.

After driving the Ram for a month and going back to my 12th gen 2014 f150... I don't miss the Ram at all other than its slick 8 speed.
I dunno, the Ram just felt "lighter" but also didn't feel as solid overall. Also, to note... the F150 and Tundra have SUBSTANTIALLY more interior room to the Ram or Chevy on the crew cab.

the hemi is potent, and the value is very good on the Ram... and to me, even with the latest GMC/Chevy/F150 offerings, I think the Ram is one of the sexiest looking trucks.

Problem with Ram is likely non-engine durability (electrical) and the d'bag connotation.

[InRich]

Originally posted by 94boosted
I just picked up a 2015 Sierra SLT All Terrain w/ 5.3 & 3.42 Axle Ratio and I absolutely love it. I got just shy of 10K off with corporate pricing and 0% financing for 84mo making it a great deal.

I had spent a lot of time researching & comparing the other big 3 and in my opinion here are the pro's/con's for each.

15' F150 Lariat w/ 3.5EB
- Interior looks like it will become dated very quickly, cabin felt dark and cramped with a huge A-Pillar
- The 3.5EB is definitely more powerful than the GM 5.3 but not as substantial of a difference as I was hoping for especially considering its need for premium fuel to make max power
- By far the most expensive when comparing apples to apples
- Even with its aluminum body the weight savings over the GMC w/ 5.3 are minimal

15' Ram Sport Loaded w/ Hemi
- Very nice interior
- Exterior looks dated
- The service at Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep is an exercise in frustration

15' Tundra Limited
- What a joke, interior looks like it was plucked from 2009
- The worst gas mileage of the bunch
- More powerful on paper than GM 5.3 but the butt dyno proves otherwise



Finally a car err truck you and I can agree on ;)

let me know if you notice any vibration in the truck at high way speeds plz.

[r3ccOs]

Originally posted by InRich


let me know if you notice any vibration in the truck at high way speeds plz.

guaranteed this means they didn't balance your tires right. nothing else typically would do this "only" at highway speeds unless your ball joints are already gone.

[Cos]

.

[94boosted]

Originally posted by Cos


Ah I see, that includes your preferred. The -9100 is after preferred for me, yeah something like -5000 if you go 0%. I can get about 3% which works out to less in 4 years than the 4600 so I was going that way. The truck I priced out was exactly that, $49,000 or something (Kodiak) for $36.

Wasn't a 2015 Avalanche (yeah don't think they make them), was a used 2012 for almost the same price. It had tow package so was seeing if I would like that instead of a new truck. I dont NEED a truck, I NEED to tow so a Tahoe or Yukon would be fine. 2015 Tahoe was $83,000. HAhahahaha

Damned nice though honestly.

I love having preferred pricing, makes negotiating so much easier. Cost plus a couple hundred bucks and done.

The pricing on the Tahoe/Yukon seems to be out to lunch. So you're comparing a 2012 Avalanche to a new Sierra/Silverado?

[k1l4m]

Congrats on the new truck!

[Graham_A_M]

Epic, good choice on the truck. :thumbsup:

[Cos]

.

[94boosted]

^ Ahh I see :thumbsup:

[Darkane]

Originally posted by 94boosted
I just picked up a 2015 Sierra SLT All Terrain w/ 5.3 & 3.42 Axle Ratio and I absolutely love it. I got just shy of 10K off with corporate pricing and 0% financing for 84mo making it a great deal.



Finally a car err truck you and I can agree on ;)

For now :D

[Strider]

Still waiting for OP to update with an actual "fully loaded" truck with his $20k negative equity rolled in.:bigpimp: