You obviously haven't experienced a Wisconsin winter!! The back window on my 2001 SCrew frosts and ices up all the time when I'm forced to leave it sit outside (usually only at work). That's why I'm definitely getting the rear defrost on my 2004 FX4 SCrew! Should be getting it near Nov. 8 I hope, depending on build completion and shipping time.

 

Nope...just PA and IL winters, and those quite some time ago. I guess you folks in the ice belt would have more trouble with frost at that.

 

I get about 430 miles before my low fuel light comes on. (35.7 gallon tank)

 

Before you decide, drive a truck with the moonroof. It is dramatically different. It may not make as much sense for Wisconsin, but then again we only get so many "nice days" and an open roof makes the most of it.

 

Moonroof, power rear slider, and audiofile are 3 options I would hate to do without on my Lariat Supercrew.

 

Well, I didn't get the power sliding rear window, OR the Rear defrost. I don't need the rear slider, but this morning, here in Ohio, my windows were all fogged up from the cold morning and it took forever to clear the rear window. No big deal I guess with the mirrors, but you couldn't see a thing out the back glass until the entire cab was warmed up. I'll probably put a cap on it anyway...

 

[soap box mode]

Far be it for me to second guess anyones trim choices on their truck, but I do find it interesting to see how successful Ford (and the other mfg) have been at the 'upselling' of the truck buying public. Seems the 'everymans' truck has become more of a luxury status symbol, than many would have ever envisioned, and certainly in more than a few cases, WAY more money than one would have ever dreamed of spending on a truck.

Just as a magician uses misdirection to work their slight of hand, the automobile mfg marketing gurus use their bells and whistles to subtlely move buyers from a practical $20,000 vehicle, to something approaching nearly $40,000. And in the case of the heavy duty truck buyer, the 'dieselfication' of that segment has pushed a good number of buyers well past that mark, to where many are (now) paying closer to $50,000 for a truck!

If you based your perception of relative wealth in this country on the price of the trucks being bought, you would think everyone in this country has gotten rich in the last decade. My understanding of economics would suggest otherwise. It is no secret, that as a percentage of income, the cost of automobile ownership has far exceeded the rate of the average wage increase. The real truth, is that in a large number of cases, buyers are just financing more money for a longer period of time; like what was once paid for in 3 or 4 year, is now often becoming a 6 or 7 year commitment. Yes, we are currently enjoying a low interest rate environement, but for those that not have not missed the fact their car payment is now larger than a mortgage payment they once considered a significant financial obligation, seems like something is out-of whack with this picture.

All of this boils down to needs vs. wants. Where you live, what kind of conditions you drive in, and what sort of utility you require (towing & hauling), should dictate the majority of your needs; but for many of us, the Siren's song is soothing music to our ears, and the want temptations are only an easy sales pitch away.

The big picture stuff is where the pricing escalation begins. For example: How many have bought a four wheel drive truck, when a two wheel drive would have easily sufficed? Pretty easy to rationalize these things, as I know from my own practice in doing so. Does everyone really need a four door truck, or even an extended cab? The new console on the FX4 and Lariats are sweet; but that one interior option ends up bumping people up several pricing notches, as the additional power, heated and leather seats (that often go with it) then become considerations. Not sure when leather became such a common truck option, but I can still remember when we were all fine with vinyl and cloth options. More power has always been an easy sell for most of us, but do we really need the bigger and more powerful V-8, versus the standard 232 horse 4.6L motor? Maybe if folks had the choice of a manual transmission, that motor would be adequate for their needs, but unfortunately (for some), you are forced to take (and pay for) an auto tranny the mfg. wants you to have instead.

I am rambling here, but thought I would share some of my thinking process, as I search through the dealer truck inventories and marvel at the wide range of pricing one finds on trucks these days. One thing is for sure, if you don't draw the line somewhere, the dealers will gladly help do it for you. Dunno where I'll end up in the needs vs. wants tug-of-war, but I do know, that with a bit more personal restraint and a few less dollars dumped in to the tow vehicle, it might allow some dollars left over for toys to go with it instead! Red04's post is a perfect example of this sorta thinking. All of this is (of course) a highly personal decision and what a person is willing/able to spend, is very definitely up to them to decide for themselves. Thanks everyone, for sharing your thoughts and opinions, as your comments do help sort things out.

[/soap box mode]

 

There's some very good points here. It is amazing how much a new truck costs these days. After all, these are TRUCKS we're talking about here isn't it? These were supposed to be for hauling and towing (working) originally. If you want pure luxury...there's better vehicles for that...better mileage, exceleration, etc.

I guess Ford had to keep up with the Expys...even though the vast majority of those will never see so much as a smooth dirt road. I hope the truck buyers won't fall into the "status conscience" trap as well. No offense to anyone that owns an Expy here....it's just that I've seen a lot of single women driving these monsters....but that's another issue.

My income isn't keeping up with the truck pricing, that's for sure. I'll barely be able to swing the XLT.

 

Hmmphff

My income is sufficent to buy a loaded FX4, and I'm not having trouble paying the mortgage on my $575,000 house at the same time.

I appreciate the opinions above, and you are probably correct in some respects (even if you don't cite any data to back your claims). However, your presuppositions about who buys trucks and why they buy them may be be founded more on the stereotypical views people have about truck buyers, than any real world experience. Here's a link for you

My other car is a..............

 

What claims exactly do you need data for?

Also, you seem to be making a presupposition yourself. I'm not a first-time truck buyer... is there some other "real-world experience" that you are referring to??

I'm glad that you're doing well for yourself, btw.

 

Quote


Hmmphff

My income is sufficent to buy a loaded FX4, and I'm not having trouble paying the mortgage on my $575,000 house at the same time.

I appreciate the opinions above, and you are probably correct in some respects (even if you don't cite any data to back your claims). However, your presuppositions about who buys trucks and why they buy them may be be founded more on the stereotypical views people have about truck buyers, than any real world experience. Here's a link for you


HE'S SO MODEST TOO !!!!

 

Keep in mind, a $575,000 house in CA is about 900 sq feet.

just messin' wid you Harm, don't sue me.

 

I say, if you have the means to get what you really want, then go ahead and get it, if it's within reason. If you skimp, then you won't be happy with what you do get. You only live so long. So if you can get it, go ahead. Chances are you'll save money in the long run by getting what you want and keeping it longer. Rather than not getting what you want and then getting rid of it sooner.

 

I think those comments may have been directed at my original post scooterjohn, so I will attempt to answer Harm's reply.

I think scooterjohn may have been right about touching a nerve, as it is hard to interperet this comment as anything other than a purposely braggadocious remark.

[For those that may be curious to know, if you put 20% down on a $575,000 house, the payment (assuming 6% for 30 years) would be $2757 per month in P&I -- well above the median price home in most places.]

While I didn't feel the need to cite date, there is no arguing, that in terms of absolute dollars, the cost of automobiles has risen considerably in the past decade. If you want some interesting statistics, read what the Dept. of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics has found about the real cost of transportation -- link here. That data shows, automobile ownership costs are the second largest household expense in the U.S. . In fact, the average household spends almost as much on their cars as they do on food and health care combined for their entire family.

To be fair, those trying to push a mass transportation agenda are also using these statistics to further their agenda. They are also extending the argument by stating: "As families spend more on getting around, they have less available to save for a down payment on a house and can also be more susceptible to debt burdens that will destroy their chances for mortgage approval." While (of course) there is merrit to this argument, statistics can be used to counter this argument, by showing that income minus transportation costs have, in fact, actually risen over the past decade. [see: this link]

As I have no interest in debating statistics, this is the last comment I will make about the subject.

I do not feel like I was presupposing here. I was merely stating an opinion on how the automobile mfg have succeeded at getting the consumer to option their trucks to a price point that is roughly egual to that which is considered luxury (or 'near-luxury') priced vehicles. Just as the SUV has replaced the station wagon of our parents generation; the truck, which was once considered déclassé by elitists (and the like), is now being marketed to former luxury car buyers. No need for stereotyping, as the number of first time buyers, and the emergence of the four door truck popularity, both bear out the reality of a new truck buying demographic.

Not sure if the link to the Toyota pic was meant to insult, or was merely pointing out you drive an economy car as well, but either way, it has nothing to do with my original point about the escalating cost of the average truck; and how the option choices we are given, are carefully designed to do that very thing.

 

I am new to posting have been reading the messages for a few months. There have been some very valid points made in this thread. Sure new trucks regardless of their use have gone up considerably in price as has the length of time you pay for them. I am in sales and have over 260k on my 1997 F-150. When I purchased the truck I wasn't on the road all the time as I have been the past couple of years. I would in retrospect have upgraded to an automatic, cruise control, and captains chairs. In my long hours in the non reclining bench and having to roll down the window to tell the border patrol that I am a citizen, I have come to the conclusion that if you are going to drive something for as long as I have you might as well get all you want as the additional options generally only increase your payments marginally. That is why this time around I am getting a fully loaded FX4 Screw with all options on the "Z" plan.