Jump to content
  • Custom Search


Sevensecondsuv

When did F150 get so pricey?

Recommended Posts

 

Starting price: (Regular cab, 4X2, base package)

Ram: $26,105

Silverado:$27,365

Tundra: $29,610

Titan (does not offer regular cab):$29,640

F-150: $25,800

 

Top of the line: (crew cab, 4X4, top trim level)

Ram: $53,930

Silverado: $52,735

Tundra: $44,435

Titan: $44,955

F-150: $54,775

 

So the F-150 is the cheapest and the most expensive...

 

In other words, F150 has you covered whether you want a cheap work truck or a maxed-out luxo cruiser.

 

It also bears noting that some of the features in the F150 are NOT available in the others. So being 'most expensive' likely isn't between comparably equipped vehicles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, depreciation. You load with skidsteers, skip loaders and such the bed and tailgate take a beating. You drive in mud and muck and the undercarriage gets awful scuffed up, You drive through the woods, the paint gets scratched from underbrush. I have been using pickups like this for over 40 years and believe me, there is depreciation. Again, mine are not "go for a night out" pickups that never see anything but the occasional bag of mulch. Might just be me and the crowd I associate with, but new fullsize pickups may be capable, but they are just too pricey.

 

That's not depreciation, that is damage. If you expect a gently used vehicle to have the same value as an abused vehicle, then you need to wake up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not abuse. It's daily use around my part of the world. Abuse is hauling a bed full of seed across a chisel plowed field at 45 mph.

 

ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hence my 95 that I painted in my shed. You can only use a certain type of truck for such tasks.

 

Exactly! You want to beat the hell out of a truck, buy a used one. Don't scratch, dent, tear up a truck and expect it to hold the same resale value as one that is kept in pristine shape. That goes for everything...houses, trucks, cars, women...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on a sidenote, I remember when gas was less than a $, and the house I bought was $225000 and is STILL a fixer upper and is now worth $600k!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand the fuss about high fuel prices in Europe. Yesterday in Italy it was €1.40. :) :) :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't get over what my 5 year old truck with 75K on it is worth, it is really amazing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was playing around at Ford's website. A reg cab, 2wd, V6 xlt trim F150 starts at $32k. Add an optional engine, trailer hitch, and a few other options and you're staring $35k in the face. Am I the only one who thinks this is completely out of line? I mean it's got no options other than the chrome bumpers, carpet and power door locks that come with the xlt trim. The XL starts at $24k. There's no way carpet, chrome, and power locks cost $8000.

 

My suspicion is that the aluminum really jacked Ford's cost up. I mean think about it. As a raw material, aluminum costs 10x what steel does and the aluminum body panels need to be thicker than the steel ones which means more material per truck. There is enough margin in the popular four door 4x4 models to cover it. Ford is probably taking a loss on the XLs just to remain competitive in the important fleet market. The low option XLTs is where the extra cost associated with aluminum really shows up though.

 

Thoughts?

 

$32,000 in 2015 =

$29,494 in 2010

$26,278 in 2005

$23,274 in 2000

$20,518 in 1995

 

So if you spent $20k in 1995 buying a F-150 XLT, you are spending the same amount today at $32k. And I'm pretty sure the 2015 XLT is a lot nicer than then that 1995 XLT.

 

Edit: found a window sticker from 1995 XLT 5.0 V8 with preferred equipment package (which are now standard equipment on XLT) short bed: $19,695... you get the point... $32k in 2015 is almost exactly what you'd pay at any point in recent history of F-150.

 

0730001550.jpg

 

And another one... this time a 1995 XLT 4X4 for $25,291

 

DSCN0244.jpg

Edited by bzcat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

full sized pickups are perfect example of government intervention.

 

eliminate the chicken tax and these prices will fall.

 

being able to offer less expensive imported full sized, medium and compact pickup trucks, drop prices in the Segment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it's your belief that if there was no "chicken tax", Toyota would import the full size trucks that they manufacture elsewhere in the world and sell them at a considerable discount in the United States.

 

Or would it be Hyundai, finally having an opportunity to sell their half-tons in the US?

 

 

 

 

Oh, I know. VW. VW has been longing to enter the truck market in the US, but they just can't because of that mean old chicken tax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so Biker, why would a Tundra imported from Japan be cheaper than one built here in the USA?....wouldn't be that currency manipulation again would it?...hmmm, wonder why Toyota ( on paper ) is so profitable ( especially given their biggest and most profitable market is IN JAPAN ) ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's doubtful that any company would manufacture fullsize trucks on another continent, given that the market is almost exclusively North American, and there is no chicken tax in NAFTA.

 

It is also doubtful that compact trucks disappeared from the market because they were too expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it's your belief that if there was no "chicken tax", Toyota would import the full size trucks that they manufacture elsewhere in the world and sell them at a considerable discount in the United States.

 

Or would it be Hyundai, finally having an opportunity to sell their half-tons in the US?

 

 

 

 

Oh, I know. VW. VW has been longing to enter the truck market in the US, but they just can't because of that mean old chicken tax.

 

 

so Biker, why would a Tundra imported from Japan be cheaper than one built here in the USA?....wouldn't be that currency manipulation again would it?...hmmm, wonder why Toyota ( on paper ) is so profitable ( especially given their biggest and most profitable market is IN JAPAN ) ....

 

 

It's doubtful that any company would manufacture fullsize trucks on another continent, given that the market is almost exclusively North American, and there is no chicken tax in NAFTA.

 

It is also doubtful that compact trucks disappeared from the market because they were too expensive.

 

With the margins in the full sized Truck market it would be inevitable that another maker would enter the segment, if the barriers to entry weren't there.

 

If the chicken tax were applied to the Transit connect when it was introduced how likely would it have been that ford would move assembly to the US just to Sell it here?

 

the ranger starts at $16k in Thailand, lowering the price of medium and compact pickups would have an effect on the Price makers Are able to charge for full sized trucks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

need I state that the Ranger in Thailand would inflate substantially after federalization, emissions AND shipping.....anyone remember Mahindra ( and yes, our dealer principle just came back from THAt lawsuit, I guess we invested ) oh, and Transit connect will eventually be made here....initially the vehicle was an experiment to see if the segment was worth pursuing...now seems everyones on that bandwagon...I still think they should have bought the slightly larger Torneau though ( spelling? )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I still think they should have bought the slightly larger Torneau though ( spelling? )" — it's got a longer wheelbase; height and width are the same on the Transit Connect and the Tourneo Connect. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the margins in the full sized Truck market it would be inevitable that another maker would enter the segment, if the barriers to entry weren't there.

 

First of all, let's dispense with the notion that the barriers to entry are created by the government:

 

Toyota Tundra.

 

Nissan Titan.

 

Why aren't these products successful?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is it PERHAPS because there is a certain amount of SKILL involved in building a vehicle that can carry over 5,000 lbs or haul 12,000 lbs WITHOUT riding like a buckboard? A two ton vehicle with 6,000lbs of payload/towing capacity that can achieve over 25MPG unladen, that can come equipped with every luxury item available on a vehicle---depending on configuration? A vehicle that comes in at least three different cab configurations, three different bed configurations, two different driveline configurations.

 

Hmm?

 

Heaven forbid that you ever EVER, EVER concede that a NA-engineered product display even a modicum of skill in its engineering.

 

---

 

Twenty years on and Toyota hasn't figured out jack-squat, and you think that if the chicken tax were gone we'd be up to our armpits in competitive product from companies that have absolutely no idea how to build a fullsize truck.

 

Because, after all, since it's not small and wasn't engineered in Europe, it must be childishly easy to duplicate, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I still think they should have bought the slightly larger Torneau though ( spelling? )" it's got a longer wheelbase; height and width are the same on the Transit Connect and the Tourneo Connect. :)

We have the Torneau Connect, it's called Transit Connect here. The TC is available in two wheelbases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Toyota built a frickin' one billion dollar factory because they thought they had it all figured out. That's how confident they were that they understood not only what American truck buyers wanted but how to provide it to them.

 

How'd that work out for them? They ready to go aluminum? Were they the first company to put small displacement turbos in their trucks? Have they had class leading *anything* at *any* point in their run?

 

--

 

But, oh, of course, the really high margins will draw in all sorts of companies who could *easily* build *competitive* product because it's just a bunch of stupid hillbilly stuff for stupid hillbillies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's fairly obvious that fullsize truck market will not be meaningfully different without chicken tax, primarily because it is a very localized market segment exclusive to North America. Other car companies will not be able to leverage their existing products to sell in the US because there are no existing fullsize truck products in their portfolio.

 

However, I venture to say that the van market will be drastically different without chicken tax. VW, Toyota, Daimler would have all been in the market the whole time (remember, the tax was specifically aimed at VW) and Ford may not have risen to its current dominant position with more competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly. But recall that the Econoline in the early years of the chicken tax was largely similar to the Transit, suggesting that at least in the early going those products would have been no more competitive on this side of the Atlantic than they were on the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

First of all, let's dispense with the notion that the barriers to entry are created by the government:

 

Toyota Tundra.

 

Nissan Titan.

 

Why aren't these products successful?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is it PERHAPS because there is a certain amount of SKILL involved in building a vehicle that can carry over 5,000 lbs or haul 12,000 lbs WITHOUT riding like a buckboard? A two ton vehicle with 6,000lbs of payload/towing capacity that can achieve over 25MPG unladen, that can come equipped with every luxury item available on a vehicle---depending on configuration? A vehicle that comes in at least three different cab configurations, three different bed configurations, two different driveline configurations.

 

Hmm?

 

Heaven forbid that you ever EVER, EVER concede that a NA-engineered product display even a modicum of skill in its engineering.

 

---

 

Twenty years on and Toyota hasn't figured out jack-squat, and you think that if the chicken tax were gone we'd be up to our armpits in competitive product from companies that have absolutely no idea how to build a fullsize truck.

 

Because, after all, since it's not small and wasn't engineered in Europe, it must be childishly easy to duplicate, right?

 

We will agree to disagree.

 

an more affordable medsized or ful sized pick up would have an effect on the market, some people will choose price over capability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×