# Long Term GM guy thinking Ford



## 353628 (Jun 30, 2006)

I've had GM's for years, need to upgrade to a heavyer truck - thinking a diesel - GM doesn't offer the Plow prep package for their crewcab 2500HD - It's not a problem to with the f250 super duty. I can hang any plow I want on it (thinking a Boss V 9ft 2) 6,000 front GVR.

Now as a long term GM guy its hard to start thinking Ford, but the fact they didn't go bank rupt says something in itself.

Anyway I put a similar post on the Chevy Truck forum, Of course all those guys said to go with the GM duramax - 

I've heard a couple issue with the new Fords pulling in snow to the intake, Also something about they don't back up fast (can't imagine that) and then the durability of the ford Diesel.

Figured someone on this forum would be able to tell me why to go with the Ford F250 super duty.

Why should I buy go with the Ford Diesel over the GM duramax - (or should I wait and get the 2011 Ford next spring?


----------



## Steve G. (Jan 18, 2009)

If it was my choice I would wait to get the '11, it seems to be a really good motor they're making, but we will know the truth when it actually is on the market. My .02


----------



## rob_cook2001 (Nov 15, 2008)

I would not, will not buy something the first year out. That being said i would go with a 2010 or a left over 09, they are doing great deals on 09's right now. I have a 2009 F-350 with a 6.4 and love the truck, great power, good ride and pretty good fuel mileage. The 6.4 in the 08's-10's is a great motor. I believe that ford builds a stronger truck but the gm's do have a good motor and very nice interior. I have owned superduty diesels since I started driving and love them. They also have a straight axle which is much stronger than IFS, The TQ shift is also a great trans. I would say buy the ford and be happy :} One last thing the fords are considerably less money than a similar equipped GM.


----------



## badabing1512 (Aug 28, 2008)

resale is way way higher on a gm dmax than ford, and i wouldnt go as far to say the 6.4 is a great motor. Its had its fair share of problems. The LMM has provent to be the best engine out of the 6.7 cummins, 6.4 powerstroke and 6.6 duramax.


----------



## OhioPlower (Jan 13, 2004)

The LMM has done the best cause its a LBZ with a DPF and the LBZs are good. Nothing new to go terribly wrong except the DPF. I like the 6.4, May end up buying a slightly used 09 in the spring


----------



## got-h2o (Sep 26, 2008)

I know a 6.4 on its 3rd engine with under 100k. 

The new Fords are nice, don't get me wrong, but I'm still way too partial to GM.

That being said, I think plow prep is a joke. I've had MVP's on every one of my CC Dmaxes and never one problem. And I run high milage trucks.

Not to mention, you're considering going with a 3/4 ton truck, yet expect it to be as HD as possible. If thats the case, consider going with a SRW F350 or 3500 GM.

Now for the going bankrupt thing.........that's what the bailout prevented. For one there's waaaaaay more to it than many think, for two I think it says something for GM that the Gov't was willing to step in and give them a loan. It sounds like a lot, but 15 mil really isn't, and the outlook is to supposedly have it payed back 3 years sooner than required. GM was the leader in sales for the last 84 years, and last year lost out to Toyota......not Ford. More sales means more warranty claims, means more $$ to potentially lose. 0% for the last how many years through GMAC, and the list goes on. All their $$ is out, and personally I can understand why. All to please the customer, and I am pleased. 

The gov't helped out every manufacturer. Cash for clunkers bailed them all out.......especially Ford. They were the highest amount sold on the list for that program. GM was like 10th. If you really want to do the figures, I'd say Ford was helped out more than GM in the big picture.

Finally, Ford had a sh!t ton of layoffs, many permanent, just to prevent BK. They kicked how many of their employees to the curb..............Now I know GM closed dealers too, but that's not to say others didn't basically do the same thing.


----------



## rob_cook2001 (Nov 15, 2008)

I do not want to start a GM vs Ford discussion, I think everyone of the Big 3 make good truck, and all have had problems. Resale in my area is not much different between all three (unless it is a 03 or 04 6.0).
I have not seen any 6.4's with major motor problems but i am sure there are some out there, with so many trucks you are bound to have some problems, I have seen a LBZ burn a hole in a piston due to a hung injector. I have also ran into more than a few electrical problems in Late model gm's (power seats that went out, power mirrors, and radio controls on the wheel. Like I said they all make good trucks but I have never been disappointed in my superdutys.
Robert


----------



## Eyesell (Nov 7, 2003)

Engine is one thing, but you must remember that the Ford is better for plowing as it has a straight axle up front, all GM did on the 2500HD and 3500HD's was make the frame deeper. For example, it went from 4" tall to 5-1/2"...again this is just an example but you should get the point. But as you said this is the reason Ford can offer a plow prep package and GM cannot.

Flip side, my last 3 trucks did not have the plow package and I never had front end problems. I figure I plow as much as the next guy so it's all how you take care of them. I never drive around with the plow on when not plowing....

Just my .02 cents worth


----------



## mcfly89 (Nov 2, 2005)

Eyesell;849722 said:


> but you must remember that the Ford is better for plowing as it has a straight axle up front,


 "better" if you like having your spine rearranged everytime you hit a bump. maybe your roads are in better condition there. ours arent so I would have a REALLY hard time saying that the straight axle is "better".

and as for going with a ford diesel over a GM diesel ...:laughing: good luck with that


----------



## suzuki0702 (Apr 6, 2008)

lol...what a pissing match. i hate getting involved in these discussions....its all about brand loyalty...another dissatisfied gm customer says enough lol...i dont see a dodge guy yet trying to defend his brand!! but id go dodge for the solid axle. chevys are for grocery moms looking for a smooth ride. real trucks have solid axles!


----------



## mcfly89 (Nov 2, 2005)

suzuki0702;849828 said:


> lol...what a pissing match. i hate getting involved in these discussions....its all about brand loyalty...another dissatisfied gm customer says enough lol...i dont see a dodge guy yet trying to defend his brand!! but id go dodge for the solid axle. chevys are for grocery moms looking for a smooth ride. real trucks have solid axles!


might double check here, but i dont think the new dodge is solid front axle. ford was the first to go independent front suspension and they never figured out how to keep tires on it. I have an 88 f250 with ifs, i have a 99 f250 with solid front, i also have an 01 gmc with ifs...its not about brand loyalty, its about what works best for a variety of situations...and the gm ifs does...period. 
the ford solid axle works too, just not better...although if you intend to abuse your machine, the solid axle is cheaper to fix usually.

the more i think about it, the more this thread annoys me and should be deleted. You posted this in the chevy forum and in the ford forum. you also posted that "those chevy guys were just all telling you to get a chevy because they are biased" so what if the ford guys do the same thing. you still havent gained anything, all you've done is incite a riot with nothing to show for it. you still are gonna have to make up your own mind, you still dont have anyhting more than hearsay to base YOUR opinion on...and best case, even the ford guys admit they dont have a diesel they can count on at the moment.

sounds like a wasted effort to me and I feel dumber for having "tried to help"


----------



## smoore45 (Oct 27, 2007)

got-h2o;849449 said:


> If you really want to do the figures, I'd say Ford was helped out more than GM in the big picture.


:laughing::laughing::laughing:

Oh, that was great. Thank you, I needed a good laugh today.


----------



## rob_cook2001 (Nov 15, 2008)

and best case, even the ford guys admit they dont have a diesel they can count on at the moment. 
[/QUOTE]

I am a ford guy and totally Disagree with that. I have driven ford diesels my whole life (have also owned 4 cummins and have a cr cummins in my ford race truck..But I will not hesitate to drive any of my powerstrokes across the country. Even my 6.0 they are great running motors when taken care of.
Robert


----------



## THUNDERBOLT (Aug 23, 2007)

Lets see the Ford truck has out sold GM trucks for how long now??????


----------



## cold_and_tired (Dec 18, 2008)

I would forget about any of the newer trucks and go for a 2000-2002 7.3. Millions of them out there and they have proved themselves to be rock solid.

Take what you saved over buying a new truck and put it towards a BTS transmission and you will never regret it. If you do find an older 7.3, look at a set of "X-Code" front springs. They are the springs used in the Snow Plow Prep Package and are standard on the F-450's.

I will say that I have picked up two of my contracts because the guy broke the front end off of his Chevy while plowing. A straight axle just seems to handle it better although they do ride rougher.

In my opinion Chevy got the interior right, Dodge got it right with the Cummins and Ford got it right with everything else. The combination of the three would be a perfect truck.


----------



## suzuki0702 (Apr 6, 2008)

mcfly89;849849 said:


> its not about brand loyalty, its about what works best for a variety of situations...and the gm ifs does...period.
> the ford solid axle works too, just not better...although if you intend to abuse your machine, the solid axle is cheaper to fix usually.
> "


your kidding right? how does the gm ifs work better ? i dont like adjusting torsion bars to "help" hold my plows weight.im going to disagree with you on that one. there isnt but one advantage to ifs.........ride comfort.......and u can count on it breaking. i am ford biased BTW


----------



## got-h2o (Sep 26, 2008)

smoore45;849951 said:


> :laughing::laughing::laughing:
> 
> Oh, that was great. Thank you, I needed a good laugh today.


I'll try to find where the #'s were posted for the actual amounts granted per brand. I was being serious, not trying to make you laugh. You'd probably sh!t if you really knew. Ford was #1 and GM was #10 that I do know........cash for clunkers that is. The amount of Fords that were bought and traded in were phenominal. Most don't view it as gov't aid, but what do you call it then?


----------



## got-h2o (Sep 26, 2008)

smoore45;849951 said:


> :laughing::laughing::laughing:
> 
> Oh, that was great. Thank you, I needed a good laugh today.


Here ya go, no #'s but the vehicles. The first program was alloted 1 BILLION dollars and it burned up in the first MONTH. That's how much went toward the trades ($4,500 each). That was expected to last a year. That's just the first round. Here's the list:

The Top Ten Cash for Clunkers Trade-Ins:
1. 1998 Ford Explorer

2. 1997 Ford Explorer

3. 1996 Ford Explorer

4. 1999 Ford Explorer

5. Jeep Grand Cherokee

6. Jeep Cherokee

7. 1995 Ford Explorer

8. 1994 Ford Explorer

9. 1997 Ford Windstar

10. 1999 Dodge Caravan

The Top Ten Cash for Clunkers New Cars:
1. Ford Focus

2. Honda Civic

3. Toyota Corolla

4. Toyota Prius

5. Ford Escape

6. Toyota Camry

7. Dodge Caliber

8. Hyundai Elantra

9. Honda Fit

10. Chevy Cobalt


----------



## cold_and_tired (Dec 18, 2008)

Sounds to me like there were a hell of a lot more Fords still on the roads than any other.


----------



## got-h2o (Sep 26, 2008)

cold_and_tired;850603 said:


> Sounds to me like there were a hell of a lot more Fords still on the roads than any other.


That's not what it tells me, I view it as that many were veiwed worthy of being junked vs road worthy. JMHO


----------



## smoore45 (Oct 27, 2007)

You're missing the point goth2o. I could care less about this Ford vs Chevy vs Dodge crap because they are all good trucks and they all have their little niche problems. Yes, I currently own Ford trucks, but from 97 to 03 I had a Chevy and it served me very well.

What I take issue with is your incorrect statement about Government help. At least the people had a choice which company their tax dollars went for the "Cash for Clunkers" so that is not Fords fault that more people bought those cars. Your tax dollars were decided for you to bail out Chrysler and GM to the tune of $12billion and $50billion respectively.


----------



## IHI (Nov 22, 2003)

I tend to view trucks differently than most since to me they're a tool that i use to make money year round, no different than when i make choices between say buying a hilti, dewalt, ridgid, makita, etc....they're tools...so i want a tool that's BUILT tough to withstand the punishment i put them through daily. I personally could give two craps about having a car like/lexus like interior and/or ride..i'm buying a truck...not a car or el camino. So with that when looking at the platform itself two big things stand out to me:

Front ends: straight axles will always be stronger and last longer than any IFS set up...less moving parts/joints, etc.....they dont ride as nice as an IFS, but like i said, i'm buying a truck to work forst and foremost so there will be a trade off.

Frames: Working in construction i get to see all the other fellas with their rigs loaded to the gills with trailers in tow, stuff in the beds from tool boxes to material, to liquid tanks, and everything else in between...i ALWAYS have a personal chuckle moment when i see a chebbie with a trailer hooked up since the first place i look is the body to bed gap, and so far n the construction sites anyways, the gap is always bigger at the top of the box to cab gap and get closer/tighter as it nears the rocker panel area...which to me says weak frame. 2 buddies of mine actually took their HD's back within the first week of buying when the one hooked up his skidder and trailer and the truck folded up like that, and the other buddy loaded up his 250 gallon chemical spray tank and the frame folded up.

I attended a school yrs ago to operate a Gomaco stringline paver so we had concrete company owners from all over north america there too that were purchasing and/or learning to operate this machine. One night at the hotel bar we were around the big table STS and got to talking trucks, and the one thing many of the guys from rougher territories all said, they all switched back to Fords. They tried Chevy's, they tried Dodges but those two platforms just could'nt hold up to the rough conditions they operated in..Ford was the only truck with a frame stronger enough to withstand all the beatings that were taken working in/getting to the remote locations they mostly performed in.

I love the duramax/allison combo, i aptly named my BIL's '07 HD "The Locomotive" since it towed my big race trailer easier than my F350 with the V10 does driving around all by itself...i did'nt like the fact with the CC/short box set up the chevy could only run for 1 hour before i had to stop and fill back up due to the small tank. I did'nt like i got a SES light coming back from a race in St. Louis 4 hours from home...then next monday come to find out it was a pre programmed engine hour light "just to get the truck back to the dealer" as the tech told my BIL so they can upload any updates if there were any. I dont like the fact chevy has a million different electronic sensors for everything that creates it's own nightmare when one has a glitch...when the system is fully operational it had many great luxury items, but 1 glitch and it sends the whole world into a canundrum.


----------



## plowguy43 (Jan 2, 2008)

I'd personally choose between a Ford Vs. Dodge if I were you as the HD's are setup for work far better than a Chevy/GMC. In comparing the Ford vs Dodge, it is a very close comparison in most every category and if a nice interior is what you want, then wait for the 2010 Ram 2500HD (redesigned). I personally agree with someone above, a Superduty with a Cummins Diesel and Allison Tranny would be unstoppable.


----------



## got-h2o (Sep 26, 2008)

smoore45;850871 said:


> You're missing the point goth2o. I could care less about this Ford vs Chevy vs Dodge crap because they are all good trucks and they all have their little niche problems. Yes, I currently own Ford trucks, but from 97 to 03 I had a Chevy and it served me very well.
> 
> What I take issue with is your incorrect statement about Government help. At least the people had a choice which company their tax dollars went for the "Cash for Clunkers" so that is not Fords fault that more people bought those cars. Your tax dollars were decided for you to bail out Chrysler and GM to the tune of $12billion and $50billion respectively.


I understand exactlly and you missed my point as well. Making a mockery of my statement was un necessary and the ONLY reason I continued with what I was saying. Whose fault or not, the point still stands. It doesn't make one better than the other simply b/c the government stepped in. Being "scared" to buy GM b/c of that is just plain silly IMHO. Plus the bailout program was a loan for GM, not a gift. Cash for clunkers was a gift. Like I said, I could care less who chooses which brand and why. I too hate brand wars, namely b/c the people that usually get involved are way too brand specific and fail to provide actual facts for making the decision they did. Too many people will jump on the gov't assisted topic not knowing the facts, and I don't think that's a fair argument. Our economic state is in termoil, lets not use it as an excuse as to why one truck may be better built.

If my sig had all Fords listed, I have a feeling my opinion on the topic would be a bit more valued in this thread.


----------



## smoore45 (Oct 27, 2007)

got-h2o;850988 said:


> Our economic state is in termoil, lets not use it as an excuse as to why one truck may be better built.


Good point, I agree with that as well.



got-h2o;850988 said:


> If my sig had all Fords listed, I have a feeling my opinion on the topic would be a bit more valued in this thread.


Haha, true. Maybe we should start using anonimity in our sigs:

2003 1 ton with 8' Plow
2008 1/2 ton with 7.5' Plow


Hahaha.


----------



## buckwheat_la (Oct 11, 2009)

my frame was bent last year on my HD, but it was easily fixed, however my autobody guy told me this happens to chev/gmc a fair bit, BUT due to the location of the bend it was a cheap fix ($300), so after having it fixed i boxed it in around where it happened with , so far no problems, but i guess we will see


----------



## got-h2o (Sep 26, 2008)

smoore45;850996 said:


> good point, i agree with that as well.
> 
> Haha, true. Maybe we should start using anonimity in our sigs:
> 
> ...


:d ...........


----------



## wizardsr (Aug 8, 2006)

I just cant get over the whole Government owning 60% of GM, which owns onstar, which can track and control your vehicle...


----------



## B&B (Nov 4, 2006)

wizardsr;851130 said:


> I just cant get over the whole Government owning 60% of GM, which owns onstar, which can track and control your vehicle...


Still stuck on that? If "they" want to know what you're up to they'll do it via your handy dandy little cell phone not via Onstar. Only 6% of the vehicles on the road today are Onstar equipped but 70% of the US population carries a cell phone so which is the better method? And whether you want to belive it or not "they" don't have to have ownership in the corporation to use it to "see" what you're up to. Just read the fine print on your phone contract. 

You're overlooking the forest through the tree's.


----------



## Newdude (Dec 4, 2006)

I sat down last weekend with my GM professor. I asked him why GM went to IFS. He stated that ride comfort was one reason. The other being load capacities. I further asked, "load capacities?" HE came back with: With the IFS, if you hang a plow off the front of the truck, the load is better and more evenly distributed on the axle, and still provides an excellent turning radius. Also, and obviously, he did mention the fact of turning the torsion bars to help hold the weight much better. Now, can a Ford/Dodge hold more weight without support? Yes. But, can they hold a 700lb plow, and still ride smooth and have more precision in movement? In my honest opinion, no, but to each is own.


----------



## wizardsr (Aug 8, 2006)

Newdude;851772 said:


> Now, can a Ford/Dodge hold more weight without support? Yes. But, can they hold a 700lb plow, and still ride smooth and have more precision in movement? In my honest opinion, no, but to each is own.


I don't buy it. My Fords ride like Caddies when they're loaded down, very controlled, and very compliant. A 700lb plow practically brings a torsion bar truck to it's knees while a Ford barely notices it. I run a LoPro with some goodies and mods causing the total weight to be around 1200lbs. The F350 rides perfectly with this plow on the front, with or without ballast, and the suspension drops 3/4" when raising the plow. I wouldn't dare hang this plow on a Chevy. 

I don't recall seeing anyone mentioning the frame cracking problem just forward of the axle on GM's, kinds throws the whole "more even distribution" theory out the window.


----------



## 353628 (Jun 30, 2006)

I'd like to think that was true and if so why doesn't GM offer the plow prep package for the 2500HD crew cabs - Thus the point of that goes back to my reason for starting this question in the first place. If GM said you could hang a plow on the front of a 2500HD crew cab with a duramax it would have been a hands down decision, but that's not the case, with a FORD I can do that hands down. This forum has pretty much convinced me a ford will do what I need it to do very well and I don't have any guarentee hassels. Yea, the duramax and Allison setup is stronger, but if the frame and suspenssion don't do what I need then they do me no good. I appricate all the good comments. In my mind it's just to much money to spend on a new rig to possibly void the FACTORY warranty by hanging a plow on the GM.


----------



## plowguy43 (Jan 2, 2008)

wizardsr;851130 said:


> I just cant get over the whole Government owning 60% of GM, which owns onstar, which can track and control your vehicle...


If you order your truck you can take out Onstar and save $100.


----------



## IHI (Nov 22, 2003)

plowguy43;852059 said:


> If you order your truck you can take out Onstar and save $100.


Neat looking lil dakota ya got


----------

