Find Reviews by Make:
Ford and Chevy blew the lid off our 30k-unit graph limit… don’t count the big trucks out just yet.
31 Comments on “May Sales Analysis: Full-Size Pickups...”
Read all comments
Latest Car Reviews view all
Latest Product Reviews view all
Recent Comments
- Lou_BC: @Carlson Fan – My ’68 has 2.75:1 rear end. It buries the speedo needle. It came stock with the...
- theflyersfan: Inside the Chicago Loop and up Lakeshore Drive rivals any great city in the world. The beauty of the...
- A Scientist: When I was a teenager in the mid 90’s you could have one of these rolling s-boxes for a case of...
- Mike Beranek: You should expand your knowledge base, clearly it’s insufficient. The race isn’t in...
- Mike Beranek: ^^THIS^^ Chicago is FOX’s whipping boy because it makes Illinois a progressive bastion in the...
Car Reviews By Make view all
New Car Research
Who We Are
- Tim Healey
Managing Editor - Matt Posky
News and Social Media Contributor - Timothy Cain
Sales Analyst - Murilee Martin
Junkyard Finds Author - Matthew Guy
Contributor - Chris Tonn
Contributor
- Adam Tonge
- Bozi Tatarevic
- Corey Lewis
- Jo Borras
- Mark Baruth
- Ronnie Schreiber
As I recall pre BK Chevy/GMC together always outsold Ford by around 10k+ units/mo. Interesting that Ford outsold them by about 5k last month.
Can’t wait for Z71 Silvy’s take on these numbers.
I’m guessing the word “fleet” will figure into the Silvy retort…
So what’s up with Ram? This is the freshest big truck, it is much better looking and better appointed than the prior generation, and all reviews indicate that it is a really nice truck. It has powerplants that are at least as good as Chevy (and better than Ford, by most accounts) yet it is not getting any traction.
I suspect that there is some anti-bailout spillover (as with Chevy/GMC) but this cannot explain all of the bad result.
Everyone wants to gripe about Chrysler quality, but the Town & Country is right now the leading seller among minivans.
I am not a big truck buyer and have no firsthand experience with the vehicles themselves. So so for those who know these trucks, what’s up.
I’m thinking buyer concern with Chryco’s viability has a lot to do with it.
It’s the inverse of the Camcord argument vis a vis Fusion or Malibu.
Silverado/Sierra and F-Series owners are (mostly) very happy with their purchases, so why bother trying something else out?
Far be it for me to defend that line of thinking, but I think that’s a great deal of it.
There really is no compelling reason to buy a Tundra, say, over a Silverado. Detroit put their best into these vehicles and it shows both in product and sales…
Here in East TN, the feeling is that anyone with a lick of sense and the money or credit to buy a new pickup is going to be buying a Ford, not a Fiat or a Government Motor. It sounds about as crazy as it is, but don’t shoot the messenger. I don’t think Tundras and Titans are even on the radar here.
The heavier duty versions of the Ram still come with springs, only the 1/2 ton went to coils. At my work we have both Ford & Dodge 1& 1/2 tons, I occasionally get to use both when I’m not in my Peterbilt 320.
Compared to a comparable fleet spec’ F550 the 4500 Ram with a diesel is superior the same year Fords in every relevant category for a work truck. More power, better ergonomics, less headaches from the pollution filter and more storage room. My only beef is the the Ram has slightly less visibility than a Ford.
Don’t disregard Chrysler’s decision to get rid of leaf springs in the back; they made the new Ram and more homeowner/general consumer-friendly vehicle, right at a time when those kind of customers are no longer buying trucks and we’re back to people who really use trucks for a daily living buying them. Those buyers, I bet, are still of the belief that coil springs don’t belong in the back of a truck due to durability, payload, etc. If Ford, Chevy and Toyota haven’t changed their trucks to coils, it’s for a good reason.
If Ford offered a diesel-powered F-150 SVT Raptor, I’d be over it like flies on dung.
I had no idea how poorly Nissan does in this segment, but I also thought Toyota had a better foothold than they do.
Nissan may want to consider putting its eggs into a different basket.
Nissan really does have a tiny presence in this market, but the large fleet sales of GM and Ford hide the Tundra’s inroads among individual owners.
Toyota seems to sell more than half the new full-size pickups among military folks in the town where I work. Since nearly all have leather, dual cabs, and other creature comforts, I suspect they are more profitable than most of the GM/Ford fleet vehicles.
I know that the market was bound to bounce back on a year-over-year basis from May 2009, but that F-Series jump is mind-boggling.
I know for a fact that Ford trailed (by a country mile) the incentives piled on by GM and Chrysler, so that can’t explain all of it.
The way these numbers are put together and the way the different companies sell thier vehicles skew these numbers. What vehicles count under the F-Series? I’m assuming F150/250/350, which are different trucks than each other aren’t they? Do these numbers include the even heavier F series, such as 450/550? Also, shouldn’t the GM and Chevy sales numbers be combined? They are the same vehicle and company, just rebadged?
I’m pretty sure F-series includes F-150 – F-550 for purposes of reporting sales. The F-650 and F-750 are on a completely different chassis from the other Super Duties. When it comes to promotions Ford usually does not include the 650 and 750 when talking about Super Duties. As it is, the 450 and 550 are fairly low volume models.
GM includes their heavy duty light-duty trucks in their numbers too, so Silverado includes the 1500 – 3500, likewise for Sierra.
Ford really rocks. Are the new powertrains now available in the F-series?
If so, it’s gonna be hard for the GM and Ram to keep up.
I agree with others, the concerns about Chrysler’s long term viability is enough to dissuade a lot of purchasers from buying a Ram.
I can’t tell you the Japanese trucks are any better than the domestics, but I don’t think it’s relavent. The traditional pick-up buyer, for the most part, won’t seriously consider a Japanese offering in the face of strong domestic offerings.
I’ve always been tempted to pick-up (sorry) a standard cab, Chevy or Ford. Normally, I lean Ford. But I think the new Silverados are nice. My roommate in college had a Ranger. That was the first pick-up I ever drove. Something about a plug of chaw, some good tunes, and a dog in the bed (pick-up bed, not my bed where I slept…then again…oh nevermind) made me really smile. Then Dodge came out with the revised Ram, blue with white skunk stripes, looking every bit like a Peterbuilt…Made me want a pick-up even more.
But I never bit the bullet. If I did, I too would most likely never consider an import. Just wouldn’t feel right.
Well, I did my bit. Just took delivery of a new Sierra 1500. Having been a fleet manager for the last decade I looked at Ford and GM. I got a better deal on what I needed at GM and that was that. I won’t even consider a Dodge because I know what each make costs to operate. The fanboys may not like to hear this but running costs on Dodge run 35 to 50% higher than GM or Ford, after a year, and Mopar doesn’t stand behind thier product. 100 km over the warranty and they won’t even discuss coverage, and I buy 20 to 30 light trucks a year. The only time the Dodge saves you any money is when you buy it. Most knowledgeable people know this, and when times are good they plan to trade off that Ram shortly after the warranty runs out.
When times are a little tighter, like now, GM and Ford get the nod because buyers have more confidence that the truck will last longer. For me a truck is a work tool, so I buy the truck that presents the best value. For the average consumer, Ford seems to have the more attractive product right now and that’s why they are outselling the GM twins. Another reason GM and Ford are selling a lot more trucks than Dodge (or Ram) is leasing, or lack thereof. I suspect much more of Dodge’s customer base was reliant upon leasing in years gone by, and now that consumer leasing is essentially curtailed they have a problem.
My .02 anyway.
Outside of a house, a truck like this represents the most expensive purchase for most consumers. So, I think the Silverado and F-150 are, in general (and especially in base configuration), the best values.
However, if I were buying new, a Tundra would be the only option.
GM may go tango uniform (again) with political changes (or without political protection).
Ford has been impressive, but too over leveraged to trust with a new purchase.
Ed: I like this new format. Maybe you could also rank them so that the top seller is first, followed by the next best seller, etc., and end with the lowest volume nameplate.
Wow, Ford is now beating the combined Chevy/GMC volume. That hasn’t happened in a long time.
I suspect that truck buyers are more likely to consider political factors in their purchasing than are, say, mid-sized sedan buyers. This might be shifting some business away from “Government Motors” to Ford.
Gee… ya think?
Tiredmechanic, I happen to own four dodge trucks. I use two of them for my roofing business, an 04 2500 and 05 3500 dump truck, both hemis. The cost of upkeep for both has been very low.
I have an 07 1500 for personal everyday use, with the 4.7 engine. All I’ve done to it in the three years since I’ve owned it is put gas in it and change the oil, except for one minor issue I had about a month ago. A squirrel climbed into the intake duct and ate the air filter.
I also have a 77 half ton 4×4 318 that I use to plow my driveway with. I purchased all of the trucks new except for the 77, I’ve owned it since about 95.
When it comes to diesels there is no comparison between the ford/gm and the cummins, there are some out there that have gone over a million miles without an overhaul.
The Cummins is overall a great engine (although there was the recent recall due to falsified emissions certification). The GM Duramax has been good overall, and the Ford/Navistar engines have been somewhat problematic.
Now that Ford has finally developed a diesel in house though, that makes both more power and gets better fuel economy than either of the competitors, we may see a shift.
I know what was wrong with the navistar engines and it wasn’t design and ford was never aware it was coming. There is a reason that someone leaves a partnership with hundreds of millions invested.
Nullo….I saw the comparison of the cummins and the new ford diesel in this month’s issue of truck trend. You are correct, the new ford diesel had a bit more power and got better fuel economy while towing. I’m sure that after the guys at chrysler see the article though they will start tweaking the cummins, we’ll see.
When I stated that there was no comparison between the cummins and it’s competitors I was referring to the legendary longevity of the cummins. They have been known to easily go 4-5-600k without an overhaul, and like I stated there are now some racking up over a million miles without an overhaul.
Whether or not the new ford built diesel will be able to do that remains to be seen, but if it does then I commend them for accomplishing such a great task. We’ll have to wait and see. The ford guys now have bragging rights as far as being able to say that their diesel truck is ford powered.
Moparman426W,
I’m glad to hear you are getting good service from your dodges. My experience over 10 years as a fleet manager in a very demanding environment has not been as positive. During that period several hundred light trucks from all 3 domestics have passed through our doors. We have our own in-house mechanics and keep extensive records of repair and operating costs.
As I stated earlier, to me a truck is simply a work tool so I don’t have any particuliar favourite. My job is to get the best value for my employer. My experience has been that Ford and GM trucks are within 5% of each other as far as fuel and repairs go in our application. For the first year or so, Dodge trucks are comparable but after that they begin to get more and more expensive to keep in service. We average about 60,000 km (37,500 miles) a year.
Every brand has it’s bad habits, and I have learned to avoid certain brands for certain applications. I also track downtime when repairs are needed, fuel costs per hour, tire costs etc. with a computerized work order program so I have a pretty good idea of what trucks cost to operate over a reasonable sample size.
I also have a pretty good idea of what goes wrong with each brand and when, barring accident or abuse. We run mostly diesel 3/4 ton pickups and diesel 1 tons with various bodies on the operations side and supervisors and support staff have 1/2 ton gas pickups. Lots of 4×4, gravel roads, extreme weather, heavy loads and a unionized workforce where some (not all) people think its funny to abuse company equipment. We give ’em a pretty good test. All in all I have found that I simply cannot afford to run Dodge trucks in these conditions. I do buy a few even now just to see if things change but so far the only app they can compete in is the 1/2 ton gas pickup. Even there I know we have to keep a close eye on front end components and differential bearings, including a complete inspection just prior to warranty expiry and then the inevitable “discussion” with Chrysler Canada when the dealer(s)don’t want to replace parts that are obviously worn out long before thier time. GM and Ford are not perfect either but I don’t see this type of trouble with them very often.
As to diesel engines, I do like the cummins although I liked it a lot more when it had less power and better fuel economy. The GM is OK and the Ford/Navistar is tolerable although I had a batch of early 6.0 litres that still leaves a bad memory. From a commercial operator’s point of view, all 3 of them have reached power levels that are absurd for the class of vehicle they are in, I would love to see a 250BHP/ 30MPG fleet special. My .02 anyway.
Tiredmechanic, according to what you said in your letter you mainly have 3/4 and 1 ton diesels in your fleet of trucks. So according to you the cummins diesel is more troublesome and more expensive on upkeep than the ford and gm diesels. That, my friend, is pretty far fetched.
You go on to say that the trucks are heavily abused and worked very hard. Well are you aware that the reason ford did away with the navistar engine is because it was troublesome, especially when subjected to heavy use? They were prone to blowing head gaskets, and the cab has to be removed from the truck in order to gain access to some of the head bolts on the passenger side.
The sight of super dutys in repair shops with the cab suspended by a lift was becoming fairly common. Yet you say that the ford and gm diesels are within 5% of each other as far as operating costs and upkeep go, and that the cummins is far more expensive to keep running and is less durable? I hardly think so.
And it is highly doubtful that if you had mostly 3/4 and 1 ton dodge diesels that they commonly experienced failure of the differential bearings. All of the ram diesels and 1 ton and up gas and diesel trucks use the dana 60 and 70 series rear ends, which are the strongest axle assemblies ever made for trucks in this class, and they were used in many ford and gm trucks as well.
The dodge 1500 and 2500 gas powere trucks use axle assemblies made by american axle manufacturing, previously owned by gm. This differential is actually a gm design, and was first used in their trucks. It is a pretty good design, with a low failuer rate, and there have not been any recent TSB’S on this design.
The 518/618 transmission is actually a modified version of the legendary 727, and has been beefed over the years to cope with the torque output of the cummins. This is a good transmission, with no weak points, except the torque converter has been known to fail under extremely insane loads behind the cummins, but there are several aftermarket converters that address that issue. The factory unit rarely fails behind a hemi or behind a cummins unless extremely overworked.
The 5 speed automatic used in the half tons is a mercedes unit, and is an excellent design. If you work the truck to the point that this trans fails then it’s time to move up to a bigger truck. As far as working a truck hard goes, do you realize how heavy roofing shingles are?
I misspelled “failure” in the 5th paragraph, thought I would correct it.
I work for a roofing company too and have to say that our two 1996 Cummins Dodge 3500s are my least favorite vehicles in the fleet. All our trucks are one ton trucks: 2 Dodges, 6 Fords of various ages and a beat up 86 GMC (I am not including the International crane and dump truck, both of which I have never driven)
The problem with the Dodges is a peaky turbo diesel combined with a vague and notchy 5 speed manual transmission. On the hills around Pittsburgh I have to redline the engine almost every time to keep within its narrow powerband. Sure, you can really feel the power of the turbo when it kicks in but it is a real pain trying to maintain revs with such a vague and slow shifting 5 speed manual. I much prefer driving the beat up 86 GMC with over 200,000 miles and the gasoline 350 v8. It would never beat the Dodge in a drag race but at least I can get it to shift quickly without loosing too many revs on a hill. It is MUCH less frustrating to drive.
Another reason I prefer the old GMC over the Dodges and the other newer trucks is that the GMC is much lower to the ground. I am guessing but the GMC has to be at lease 6 inches lower. This makes a huge difference when you are tying things up on the ladder rack or trying to crawl up on the bed.
As to reliability I would have to say that neither the Fords nor the Dodges have been especially reliable. Two of the Fords have spit out spark plugs. One of the Dodges has electrical problems while the other has had transmission problems. The old GMC smokes alot (but remember it has over 200,000 miles) the interior is total crap and it’s slow but all things considered, it is much more enjoyable to drive and is easier to work out of.
(The Cummins Diesel has the coolest exhaust note however)
DanT……..the 80’s 350 put out something like 285-300lbs. of torque when new. A worn out one that smokes would put out about half that much, and you say that it will outdo a diesel with a load, on pennsylvania hills?