|
2015 GMC Savana with a 20 foot box from one of Hertz's commercial truck lots. Not much to say: is truck, hauls stuff. This one is much newer than I am used to driving and it shows. The thing was in great condition. Highway speeds all day long, a nice cushy ride, predictable braking, cruise, they even give you armrests. Some other useful features were two levels of e track down the length of the box for all your ratchet straping needs, plenty of in-box lighting, and a relatively tight turn radius. That last one is a huge advantage over the Ford E250-350 trucks in the city. If given the choice in brand of box truck, I'd recommend going for Chevy/GMC.
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2019 15:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 19, 2024 20:58 |
|
|
fknlo posted:I figured there had to be pretty deep discounts on it. There's absolutely no way it's worth that MSRP. Deffo. The little things are surprisingly good tow vehicles. Known a few commercial fishermen here in FL that tow smaller boats with them. I used one to tow the tiniest, most overloaded, 12 foot cargo trailer for a week. That one had a Banks tune, 4 inch exhaust, LSD, and a port job though. Super fun without the trailer.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2020 01:14
|
|
|
2015 Ford E350 UHaul boxtruck. 20ft box, 6.8 V10, many, many gears. Way better than the last V10 rental I drove, this one was relatively fresh at 75,000 miles. It reminded my of why I like the Ford V10. Very, very quick for what it is. I had no problems merging into FL highway traffic fully loaded, no problems maintaining 80mph. The rental company set this truck up so Tow/Haul mode is engaged on startup. You'll want to turn that poo poo off. Extremely aggressive down shifting and boosted brakes almost sent me into the dash while braking moderately from 35mph. Stopped way short and pissed off the person behind me. Sorry, random dude. Mileage is far worse than the 5.4 V8 trucks, averaging 8.5mpg vs. the 12-13 I see from V8's. Great as a rental, but I'd stick with the 5.4 as an every day delivery vehicle. That era of interiors is kind of bizarre looking coming from earlier Fords, with far less stowage space. All the controls are where you expect them, so that's nice. Better seats, two buckets and a fold-down center. Pedals are far too close together compared to the older trucks I'm used to. Size 9's and I tapped the brakes while accelerating with gusto. Ford has the best mirrors on bigger vehicles, I never felt my view was inadequate in heavy traffic. A low load floor and a nice, long ramp made the work easy. Maybe 3,000 lbs. of furniture and books, up and down, didn't tax me using my own pneumatic tired handtruck. The handtruck provided (for free!) was way too short and had lovely solid tires, bring your own or suffer. It is a furniture moving truck, with wooden rails along the side, so tie-down options were a bit more limited than e-track and straps. I brought my own load bar and that seemed to work better than trying to weave straps around the rails. Overall, a very capable vehicle and easy to maneuver. I think I'll start renting U Hauls instead of the Penske trucks I usually get. Clean and in good repair, something I can't always say about Penske's commercial rentals in this area. The lack of e-track would be the only sticking point if I used it as a bread truck.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2021 17:01
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:the transmission selector may be infrequently used but it's important that it is used correctly and has visual indicators to clearly show what's happening. on the left hand side they would be potentially screened by the wheel, which you do not want. I hate, hate, HATE the rotary shifter. It does have one use though: backing a trailer is made easier with it if you have to do the back-and-forth thing into a small space. Not that the column shifter makes it hard, of course. Push-buttons all in a row would probably be the better way, but why change from column shift? At least with a column prndl, I always know "up" is park. No ambiguity, none. Punch the shifter into the roof and you will not move. For safety's sake, that is much more important than being able to shuffle between R and D with one finger.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2022 17:46
|
|
|
Borrowed 2008 Volvo S80 3.2: It's an older, decked out luxury car that has been driven by teenagers. That said, it's a nice car (for 2008). Definitely a highway cruiser and good at that. Smooth, quiet acceleration, quick to shift above around 2,500 RPM and acceptable fuel economy for the time and it's rather substantial weight. 225 miles out of half of it's 18.5 gallon tank (I forgot to reset the overall MPG function before leaving). A soft but controlled ride with one year old shocks, it stays flat in the corners and has no problem diving into the twisty bits. Braking is smooth, only "stacking up" close to stopping; nothing that couldn't be fixed if I drove the thing a bit more. It is a fairly large car and Volvo took advantage of that to provide more than enough interior space to spread out. I'm fairly average, at 6 foot and 185lb, and the only problem was a lack of raised dead pedal for my left leg, which matters a little bit because my knees (and lower back, and ankles, and feet) are getting bad. Still, relatively firm eight-way adjustable seats meant I could get comfortable quickly and stay that way for 225 miles, round-trip. This car occupies a weird place in time where it has all of creature comforts of earlier cars, but lacks a lot of stuff you'd expect from a slightly later vehicle. There is an aux 1/8 in. jack in the center console, and that worked only because I refuse to buy a phone without an audio out. 6 disk in-dash changer, a 20 preset FM and 10 preset AM radio, all there, working, and seperate from the kind of bizarre and very thin A/C controls. To their credit, the displays remind me of Paperwhite ones. Very bright and clear, with no glare, and equally readable in any light. Very basic and "8-bit" looking, but they do the job perfectly well. I wish the in-built carphone could still work, as it occupies a substantial part of the lower console, but all of the buttons do double-duty for radio controls. Super easy to get to exactly which station you want through presets or direct-dialing. Not that important, but who listens to the radio in anything but a car anymore? Controls for everything else are placed to be easily useable, if not exactly where you'd expect them to be. The trip computer, for example, is on the left stalk, with a ribbed dial inboard and "OK" button on the end. Takes a second to get used to, but very easy to use on the highway without taking eyes off the road for longer than it does to check speed. The stalks, and their mounted control switches, feel wonderful to use. Solid and positive without being truck-like, if that makes any sense. There's a feeling by doing that the designers put some thought into how you would drive the thing. Kind of odd in places, but it all makes sense. While it has a lot of plastic over everything in the engine bay, there's enough of the Old Volvo left to make checking fluid levels easy once you know where things are hidden. There are a few things that are going to need to be replaced soon, but that's a problem for later me and later Volvo thread. Overall, not a bad vehicle. It'll probably never be a "classic", even among Volvo aficionados, but a solid executive car nonetheless. If you ever need to borrow a 2008 Volvo S80 3.2, I'd say go for it. madeintaipei fucked around with this message at 01:53 on Oct 3, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2023 01:51
|
|
|
Borrowed 2024 Toyota Highlander Platinum. 2.4 turbo motor, non-hybrid. All of the options. Boring. Good boring sometimes, bad boring others. Driving-wise, it is a very good appliance. Great seating positions, working well for our 5ft-nothing and 100lb gal, to 6ft 180ln me, to 5ft 9in 280lb great granddad. You can adjust everything to accomodate everyone. Sightlines are as good as you'd expect for a long, tall vehicle with thick pillars, but the blindspot and lane keeping aids pick up the slack seemlessly. All of the driving aids feel seemless, in fact. The most it does is beep at you like you're an rear end in a top hat for not signalling and grab you by the lapels when the auto emergency braking kicks in. Just pay attention to what you're doing and it's like that poo poo isn't even there until someone else does something wiggy. Even in sport mode, you feel the weight of the thing. Acceleration is blah unless you really tip in the throttle, in which case the transmission fights you every step of the way. The engine is also very buzzy. No turbo lag, though. Steering is lifeless but precise. Cornering is pretty flat for such a heavy thing. Parking aids are to Toyota's usual standards, with a nicely positioned rear camera. I'd like to try it with a trailer. Braking is pleasantly progressive in normal driving and face-through-the-windshield when needed. The one time I had to "ohshitstopstopstop" during a tighter turn the thing went exactly where I needed it to go with no drama. Ride quality is very nice The interior is spacious. Both rows of back seats fold down to make a very nice flat floor at a height that works well for someone my height. The seats are great, even in the third row. A minimum of road noise. All you'll heard is the little motor whining about it's lot in life. All driving and comfort controls are well laid out. The infotainment system is... not needed for much so I really haven't hosed with it. Pairing devices is easy, and the wireless charging area is a nice touch. Banging stereo. Mileage is pretty lovely, but that is probably because we've only driven it in town on short trips. 23mpg average, over 6000 miles. With careful driving, better route planning, and more use of eco mode, I'm sure that would improve. Driving it feels like a teleportation device. Look, point, squirt, we're there now. Boring. Booorrr-ing. Dull, comfy, gentle, souless. Like a very professional hospice nurse. Toyota sells the Highlander. You could buy one. It's very nice. I'm house-sitting for family right now. They offered either the Highlander or the Nissan Juke (which I have reviewed here) to commute with. The Juke is growing on me.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2024 02:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 19, 2024 20:58 |
|
|
PT6A posted:I like the tiny vestigial "bed" at the rear. You could put a very small amount of something in there. I don't like the teeny bed that they put on crew cabs, either. Every time I've had to use a truck in that configuration, it's been this close to fitting what I need to haul. 6.5ft with a toolbox is still useful, as long as there's some space under the box. 8ft with a toolbox is great, regardless of box depth. Single cab and long bed is somewhat of a dying breed. To me, that's the quintessential pickup truck. Plenty of room in the bed, easy to see out of, a smoother ride while towing (and easier to see around the trailer while backing) than a shorter truck, lighter than a crew cab. You only lose one seat, too, as long as it has a bench.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2024 00:25
|
|