My wife has been trying to persuade me for a while that I
should buy a "truck".  I was resistant to the idea, but
driving (or rather wading) home through floodwater the other
day made me think that perhaps she's right.

She has a "pick-up" in mind, but I'm more inclined toward
something like a Landrover Defender, Toyota Land Cruiser or
perhaps some kind of Jeep.  I want a (Biodiesel compatible)
Diesel engine (perhaps a newfangled turbo-diesel or common-
rail) and a manual gearbox.

Constructive comments, observations and suggestions are
invited.

66 responses total.

How often would you really need a truck?

Might be cheaper to move.

Re #1: Every year during the winter.  I could also have done
  with it earlier this month because of flooding. We hope to
  buy a house this year, and I'm sure my wife will have me
  carting furniture around for some time afterwards.  It'll
  also be handy for carting computers around.

Get laptops. 

The increase in truck use is another example of the Tragedy of the Commons.
They offer increased utility of "1" to the buyer and each one makes
only a near "0" addition to global warming, oil depletion, pollution,
etc. But so many people think this way, the net effect is increasingly
serious in all regards. 

You can rent a delivery truck for $20 if you return it to the same place.
I have never seen a personal computer that would not fit in Jim's milk crate
that he uses as a bike basket.  This implies that they ought to fit into any
car big enough to hold a person.  There are probably some monitors that would
not fit his milk crate easily.  

I had to borrow Mrs. Ball's car today, as mine refused to
start.  The new vehicle decision grows closer with every
passing day.


Re #4: Environmental impact was one of the things that put
  me off for a long time.  :-/


Re #5: Renting a delivery truck isn't an option for the kind
  of applications that Mrs. Ball is likely to come up with.
  You're right that (low volumes of) PCs will fit in a car.

  I'll have to check whether there's a cycling conference
  here on Grex.  I've an idea that I used to read one here.
  I would love to buy a bicycle, but my requirements are
  probably atypical (I'll write more in the cycling conf.)
  There is no significant hope of finding another job that
  is within bicycle range, and for leisure cycling I'll
  need a motorised vehicle to get to suitable locations. :-(

You can buy an electric bicycle for much less than a car.  We saw one for
about $500.  The range of one that we asked about was 15 miles between
recharges, more if you pedal part of the way.  It could go a lot faster than
I like to bike.  It makes me unhappy when people use cars MORE because they
want to bicycle.

What kind of options cannot be done with a delivery truck but can with a
personally owned truck?

You can start a bike item in the transport conference.  They crop up
occasionally in the middle of agora items and then go away.  Jim would have
fun suggesting how to modify a bike to fit your needs.

If something is too large to fit onto a bike, it can usually be made to go
into the back of a small 2-door hatchback car.  This includes stoves and
refrigerators and building materials.  Hatchbacks hold more than 4-doors and
sometimes also more than station wagons because you can sit things upright
in them with the back door/window open.

If your main need is to haul around large amounts of stuff, consider a
station wagon.  They get better fuel economy and handle better.

If you must get a truck, keep in mind that four wheel drive models get
considerably lower fuel economy and have higher maintenance costs than
two wheel drives.  Ask yourself how often you would *really* need four
wheel drive.  You don't mention where you live, but in most parts of
southeast Michigan you just aren't going to need it often enough to
justify the expense.  My Volvo 240 has little to recommend it as a
winter car (rear wheel drive, open differential) but the previous owner,
who lived on a rural dirt road, successfully used it year 'round.

Re #8: A 'station wagon' is probably not a bad match for
  our needs, but doesn't offer better ground clearance
  (useful in winter, on roads that are flooded, being dug up
  or are just plain crap).  My Civic has been great fun to
  drive, but it's way too easy to bottom out, or just clip
  debris.

  Your observation about 4WD makes sense, there's more there
  to go wrong.  In cars and other things I tend to prefer
  simplicity.

Re #7: 15 miles doesn't get me anywhere useful, but an
  electric bike is an interesting idea.  Out of interest, do
  they charge the battery when you're coasting downhill or
  braking?

  My next pushbike (pedal bicycle) will be leg-powered. I'll
  just have to ride it locally until I (hopefully) become
  fit enough to extend my range a bit.

  A rented truck wouldn't satisfy my wife's expectation of
  instant, on-demand cargo space. When we buy a house, it's
  likely to be a "fixer upper" and I daresay she'll have me
  driving furniture, building materials and other large (or
  just odd-shaped) stuff around.

  I actually quite like hatchbacks and really enjoyed
  driving a rented Vauxhall Corsa with an interesting
  3-cylinder 1 litre engine when I was getting ready to
  return to the U.S. in 1999.  I think it's a distant cousin
  of the Geo Metro over here, but with more elegant design.
  My wife's inevitable veto aside, that was probably better
  suited to British driving anyway.

An Outback station wagon offers better ground clearance - plus AWD.
(The 2005 model has even been raised more - but mainly to be a cop-out
from "car" to "light truck" in order to bypass CAFE.)  I drive a
Legacy wagon myself, for most of the benefits of a station wagon,
better clearance than US wagons, and AWD.

I've been thinking about the Outback wagon for a while.  The AWD is
attractive when you live on roads that don't get plowed and that turn to
ice frequently.  Mainly the problem I've had with a 2WD truck is getting
started at icy intersections (especially those on hills).  It really
doesn't take much to get stuck with 2WD if you aren't careful.  So,
the idea of a little more traction to get going in those circumstances
sounds good, as does much better gas mileage.  

We, too, would not want to give up the ability to haul stuff (groceries,
bags of mulch, lumber, golf clubs, furniture, etc.) and carry a
passenger (spouse), but would like to get better MPG.  I live 25 miles
from work, 5 miles from the grocery store & pharmacy, and 10 miles from
the doctor's office. Biking is not an option, especially on the roads I
drive (narrow) and very especially with the kind of auto drivers I see
on the road every day.

I've owned two Subaru wagons in my lifetime.  Both of those had
shiftable 4WD (full time front wheel drive) and were excellent for
getting around in the winter. Both had a decent amount of space for
hauling. A luggage rack helps, too. Ground clearance was fine, though
nothing like a truck.  Gas mileage was excellent for a 4WD vehicle.

I've never had an AWD vehicle.  It seems they are getting more
sophisticated about applying power differentially to the wheels.  Our
neighbor has an AWD Audi and got stuck on the icy hill near our house
this past winter.  We were finally able to get the car up the hill by
taking a slightly faster run at at (there's a corner at the bottom of
the hill that makes gaining speed on the ice difficult unless you want
to slide into the big trees near the bridge).

So, I'd be curious how they fare in the icy SE MI winters.  

(The night my neighbor got stuck with her AWD, I took the back way into
my house, which avoided taking the hill with my truck (I've been stuck
on the icy hill before, too, and that was also a result of not being
able to take a good enough run, but due to gawkers looking at the car in
the creek beside the bridge). Note that I put 600# of sand in the back
of the truck in winter and that helps a lot with maintaining control and
getting started (but puts a dent your mileage). You definitely can't
make jack rabbit starts, though.  And if you're going too fast and try
to stop quickly, you'll slide real nice.)

It would be cheaper to get building materials delivered (it is $25 charge
around here) than to buy a large and wasteful vehicle to do it yourself.
The electric bike regenerates when you are braking, which could include
downhill.  If you pedal most of the time and use the motor only for assist
going up hills it will take you more than 15 miles.  The cheaper models do
not regenerate.

I had an older Subaru with on-demand 4WD, which I thought was great in
winter. I was also leery of AWD when the option of 4WD ended, but it
certainly has still been an improvement over 2WD on snowy streets in
winter. However *nothing* will do you much good on glare ice: 4WD slips
just as much as 2WD in a skid on ice. 

I had the starter replaced in my Civic ($220 including
labour).  I'll try to wring another year out of it if I can.

Whatever four-wheeled vehicle I eventually replace it with,
I'll miss its fuel economy (40 miles per (US) gallon, which
napkin maths suggest is about 5.7 litres per 100 km).

Perhaps I'll eventually get another motorcycle. I would like
a pushbike too. At present I can afford neither (but perhaps
the new house has a money tree growing in the garden ;-)


Re #11: What's CAFE?

Re #12: The difference between 4WD and AWD has never been
  explained to me (and I've never before found myself in the
  market for either).  Is AWD the (permanent?) provision of
  less drive to the rear wheels? Am I right in thinking that
  AWD<4WD?

I've never driven an AWD vehicle, so all I know is what I've read on the
vehicle manufacturers web sites and from watching that AWD Audi get stuck
and eventually make it up the hill.

There are a number of AWD vehicles being manufactured now.  Actually
I was kind of disappointed that Subaru switched from on-demand 4WD to
AWD.  But, they seem to think it works better, probably because it can
react quicker to changes in road conditions than a driver who has to
consciously switch on 4WD. And you had to do so at less than 50 mph,
if I remember correctly.  AWD would be available at any speed.

I was also disappointed that Subaru dropped 4WD. It was a plus that you
could run in 2WD (front) for better fuel economy on dry, even, roads, and
engage 4WD only when you needed it. It also had an extra-low gear in 4WD -
much lower than "first", which would let you climb rough rocky roads at
very low speed. A drawback of the Subaru version of 4WD was that you could
not make tight turns on dry pavement because the wheels were not
4W-differential (and if you forgot, and found the car resisting turning,
it was difficult to disengage the 4WD). 

AWD is quite different. The wheels are NOT linked with a differential. 
The differential tries to distribute power so that each wheel receives
equal torque. Therefore the wheel(s) with the least *resistance* turn(s)
the fastest and receive(s) the majority of the power. That means that you
can't budge with one wheel spinning in a mudhole. AWD provides the torque
(and power) to the wheel(s) with the *most* resistance. Hence even with
three wheels on glare ice and getting no traction, if the fourth wheel
does have traction, it will move you. AWD has therefore been called "best
wheel drive". 

A drawback is that the additional mechanism for AWD consumes some power,
and hence one gets slightly poorer gas mileage than with 2WD alone. 
Another drawback is that you cannot tow the car on just its front or rear
wheels: you have to call a garage with a flat-bed wrecker to move your car
is disabled. 

At this point I'd make no assumptions about the price of gas... 

Aside from that, I really can't see the need for a personal truck for most
people.  You can get lumber delivered, you can park a regular car much more
easily, SUVs have known safety issues, etc.

If you bought a 4WD or AWD car, how much would you save just in the purchase
and insurance?  Would spending part of that on upgrading something in your
house make your wife (and you) happier?

Re #18: What I've read here suggests that I would prefer
  (manually invoked) 4WD to AWD.  I see very few Diesel cars
  here in the U.S, certainly far fewer than in Britain.  I
  think we also had more cars available with van variants
  (including small cars like the Corsa that I mentioned).  I
  might be persuaded to forgo the extra ground clearance if
  I could find something small, but with credible space.

How about a 2-door hatchback plus a trailer for large loads?
Diesel stinks.

Today we drove around some dealerships and checked out the
available vehicles.  I was horrified.  They all seem to have
petrol/gas engines and automatic transmissions.  I think the
best quoted fuel economy that I saw was 26 MPG (9 l/100km)
and many were < 20 MPG.  It's astonishing to me that they
sell any of these things.  It's somewhat baffling that they
are even legal!  Whatever vehicle I buy, it will not be any-
thing that I looked at today.  :-(


Re #2: I don't get it.

Re #18: Gas currently costs the approximate equivalent of
  US$ 4.85 per US Gallon in Britain.  Today we paid US$ 1.96
  per US Gallon here in Illinois.

Re #20: a 2 door hatchback (generally called "3-door" by the
  car people) would suit me for the most part.  The trailer
  is a very good idea.  My wife would veto a hatchback
  though, and even though I would like one, it doesn't
  address the ground clearance issue.

  Diesel engines should be much more efficient than petrol/
  gas ones, and are often more solidly built.  A modern
  Diesel engine that is well maintained should not stink.  I
  don't think I've seen a Diesel hatchback here in the U.S.
  (although they're common enough in Britain).

My friend Nigel drives one of these in the course of his
work, and I like it. Does anyone sell something like this in
the U.S...?

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/njs.cube/photos/axion/photos/hoovering.jpg

                      ...it's a Vauxhall Corsa Combo Van.  I
understand that the chap with the vacuum cleaner is an
optional extra ;-)

A manual transmission is one of my criteria for a car: that really limits
the available models. 

Diesel engines produce soot as well as stinking.
I thought you said your wife had her own car.  How can she veto what you get
for yourself?
Did you look at cars, or vans/SUVs?  Fuel efficiency rules hold only for cars.
Half of new private motor vehicles sold are not cars (roughly).

This response has been erased.

Re #25: Suffice to say that she can. Whether that's right or
  not is a topic for another conference. We looked at trucks
  and SUVs.  I would like a /real/ utilitiy vehicle (RUV?)
  though.

Good luck finding an SUV with a manual transmission.  Probably you could get
a basic pickup truck (F150, etc) with a manual.

Re #28: I wouldn't feel comfortable buying a Ford, in part
  because of their reputation for poor reliability.  I hear
  good things about Toyota though, perhaps I'll be able to
  find a manual, Diesel Toyota truck.

26 mpg for a truck is pretty good.  I think it would be a lot cheaper to rent
one only when needed, rather than waste gasoline by using it for
transportation as well as hauling.

Re resp:9: Keep in mind that a Civic is an unusually low car.  Most
cars, including my 240, have a couple inches more ground clearance than
a Civic.

Re resp:12: "Mainly the problem I've had with a 2WD truck is getting
started at icy intersections (especially those on hills).  It really
doesn't take much to get stuck with 2WD if you aren't careful."

A limited-slip differential helps quite a bit.  So does adding weight to
the rear.  If you don't have a limited-slip diff, sometimes applying the
parking brake slightly when trying to get started on a slick surface
will help.

Re resp:20: Most current 2-door hatchbacks aren't rated for towing,
unfortunately.  My Civic's manual just said towing was "not recommended."

Re resp:29: I don't think Toyota currently sells diesels in the U.S.  VW
does, but they don't make a truck.  All the other diesels you're likely
to find will be V-8s or bigger.  The company I work for has a Chevy 2500
diesel pickup truck.  It gets about 25 mpg, which is far better than the
same truck would get with a gas engine, but still not impressive.  There
is the Dodge Sprinter (aka. Freightliner Sprinter, aka. Mercedes
Sprinter), which is available with a 5-cyl. inline diesel, but that's a
full-sized van.

Basically, diesels were briefly popular here during the two major oil
shortages.  After that, they fell out of favor.  GM produced some really
terrible V-8 diesel cars in the 70s that were unreliable, smokey, and
hard to start, and that pretty much turned people off on the whole idea.
 Then there were the early diesel VW Rabbits that were underpowered and
kept blowing head gaskets.  Basically, your typical American's opinion
of diesel engines is not very high.

Re #30: "good" for a petrol/gasoline truck perhaps, which is
  one of the reasons that I want a Diesel!

Diesel fumes are particular bad for innocent bystanders who have asthma, as
well as smelling terrible.  The soot is what bothers people with asthma. 
Minimizing driving would work better than getting something diesel.

Re 31: I did say I put 600# of sand in the rear.  That helps a lot.
Limit slip differentials are nice but not if they don't come with your
used vehicle.  Even with the extra weight, which helped a lot, it was
possible to get stuck if the hill was steep and icy.  If you're not
careful, it's really easy to get stuck.

Re #33: As a person with Asthma, I think it's nice that
  you're considerate of that.  All the talk about soot &
  smells may be appropriate to large, poorly maintained old
  engines, but it doesn't sound like any of the modern small
  Diesels that I have experienced.

  I would love to minimise my driving.  My last job had me
  based in an office literally just across the street from
  where I live.  I could walk to the recycling centre with
  the office recyclables, to the post office to collect mail
  and to the bank to deposit my paycheque.  There were times
  when I actually had to remember to drive my car just to
  'stretch its legs'.  Unfortunately those paycheques that I
  mentioned dried up, forcing me to take a job at a factory
  twenty miles away.  I wish that I could afford the luxury
  of minimising my driving.

Does anyone else in the town where you live work at this same factory?

Re #36: No, especially not on my shift (16:00 - 24:30)

Maybe you can go into business for yourself locally?  Yardwork?  That sounds
awful, having to travel 40 miles a day to work that shift.  

Re #38: It is fairly awful, and speaks of the difficult
  position that I find myself in.  I lack the financial
  resources to go into business for myself, although it's an
  option that is frequently suggested to me. I can only hope
  that things will improve once I have an Associate Degree
  to go with my existing British vocational qualifications.

  A new Ballmobile would take me to work, to earn money to
  pay car payments, other bills, tuition fees, buy textbooks
  etc.  It would also take me to college (at least 20 miles
  in the opposite direction) for those classes that I must
  take face-to-face.  I certainly couldn't afford to run one
  of the hideous gas-guzzling trucks I saw at the dealer
  -ships.  :-/

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss