Ok, I know that most of you guys are not going to like this but I cracked and bought a 2003 Silverado SS. Before all you say that the SS is overpriced and such, I bought it used and for a couple thousand more than a used 2003 Supercrew it was purchased. The SS has a very poor resale value and it was $25,000 below the list price with only 24,000 kms and just over a year old, (so 36,000 kms and 2 years left of warranty).

Anyways, compared to the Supercrew it has plenty more power, smoother ride and the fuel mileage is even better (well that last statement was semi-true, I should say the chevy is more consistent). I saw my Supercrew hit over 20 mpg, but on some trips it would only get 14-15 mpg. The chev is a consistent 17-18 mpg. The two trucks do have their advantages, even the little things, but I think the chev is better suited for me.

Ford Supercrew
- the nice big 4-doors
- 2WD/4WD capability
- the leather was a lot tougher/durable
- roomier
- clearance
- keypad on door

Chev SS
- heavy duty trans
- 345 h.p / 380 ft-lbs
- 3-level heated seats
- message center
- locking differential

As of right now I love the SS and hopefully it was as good to me as my Supercrew was. If I feel that I made a bad choice I just get into my SS and hammer on the pedal.

 

To each his own I say. As for the ride?....You buy a truck and expect it to ride like a luxury car? To me...Chevy's are more car like than Fords but thats changing with newer models. My 97 F-150 Lariat is nice on the inside but it rides like a truck which is what I expect it too.

 

Can't argue with the power, and the price was right. Plus, I think they are a good looking truck! My brother has an '04 Silverado with the 5.3 and it gets about 3-4 mpg more than my 2003 F-150 SuperCab with the 5.4.

 

congrats those are a sweet truck but i still like the ford and the way that they sit.
SOUTHPAW2

 

Good luck with your truck. Keep us posted on your truck and how it does and holds up. It will be interesting to see the comparisons between the two over an extended period off time. I wonder why they get better mileage anyway. I never could figure that one out.

 

The GM trucks weigh less in each configuration. That would account for some of the better mileage.

I watched the "Truth" videos at the Ford site about the F-150 and they seem to be built like tanks (and get corresponding mileage ).

 

Why didn't you just get a Harley Davidson supercrew? There's your power, luxury, and heavy duty trans.

 

Fastbackv10 why is it that everytime I read your posts I read the more
Edited by Admin

 

Not 100% true.

The LS1 based engines are a better design with less rotating mass.

 

OHC engines should have less rotating mass due to less valve train components as well as not having to rout the intake tunners around the pushrods.

http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/jk/040421.htm

 

I have to agree with 73fastback about the HarleyDavidson Supercrew. I think that truck would beat a Silverado SS. I'm not 100% sure on that, but I have read that the SS is not really that fast. They don't hold a candle to Lightning or SRT-10. I would say get a used Lightning, but it seems roominess is a requirement for you. The H D Supercrew would have been perfect. On the other hand, I don't agree with what you said about the OHC engines. GM's V-8's show that the traditional lay out can get just as good, in most cases better fuel economy. I'm glad they havn't changed to OHC V-8's. I still think the OHV design is less moving parts than two long chains and two cams.

 

73fastbackv10 valve train mass is not the same as rotating mass please try to get your info correct before posting

 

Prove it. Prove to me the 5.3L is better than a 5.4L. And don't tell me anything about rod ratio, the 5.4L has proven it can rev and last.

 

The LS1 engines are awesome. I'm pretty sure the 5.3 made more power and tourque, and got better fuel economy than the 5.4. But the '05 3 valve has 300 hp and 365 ft-lbs. The 5.3 has 295, and 335. But I bet the new 3v 5.4 gets even worse mileage now.

 

The LS1s are nice but I've never been impressed with the Vortec 5.3L. It feels pretty quick in the 2wd trucks but they don't weigh anything.

'03 Chevy 5.3L - 285 hp @ 5200 and 325 lb.-ft. @ 4000 rpm
'03 Ford 5.4L - 260 hp @ 4500 and 350 lb.-ft. @ 2500 rpm

You tell me which one is the better engine in a 5,000 pound truck. Even on the horsepower ratings I believe Chevy is being alot more liberal with their numbers than Ford is. I've seen bone stock '99+ 5.4Ls dyno 215 - 220 rwhp and have seen Chevy 5.3Ls dyno in the 190 - low 200s.

As for the 3V, I hear they get about the same mileage even though the trucks are even heavier than the older ones. I think the drive by wire is hurting responsiveness though. I'd be interested to see what they actually put to the ground.