Notices
2009 - 2014 F150 Discuss the 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 Ford F150
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: Moser

Civil opinions wanted.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #1  
Old 06-14-2017, 08:30 AM
jthorngate3's Avatar
jthorngate3
jthorngate3 is offline
Postmaster
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Middletown, CT
Posts: 4,753
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Civil opinions wanted.

Alright guys, I'm starting to look more seriously into a new truck. I've started doing more side work and it just makes more sense for me to have a truck as a full time driver. So, my budget is fairly low as I'm currently separating from my wife. That being said, I'm looking at 09-14 trucks and a few 04-08's. My question is this; am I better off looking at lower mileage 04-10 trucks with a 5.4, meaning around or shy of 100K miles, or a slightly higher mileage 11+ with 120K+? Obviously it's going to depend greatly on the individual truck and it's previous care, so just asking guys with experience about their thoughts. Pros and cons if you will. Thanks in advance.
 
  #2  
Old 06-14-2017, 09:25 AM
mueckster's Avatar
mueckster
mueckster is offline
Lead Driver
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Damon (South East Texas)
Posts: 8,298
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes on 12 Posts
What is your budget?
 
  #3  
Old 06-14-2017, 10:04 AM
jthorngate3's Avatar
jthorngate3
jthorngate3 is offline
Postmaster
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Middletown, CT
Posts: 4,753
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Looking for the best overall deal. I would like to keep it around 10, but for the right truck I may be willing to go up to 16-17. I plan to use side work money to pay for it and the added fuel cost, but would rather not put myself in a bad position. I presently have a ford fusion hybrid and a 97 F350. The car is getting up near 150K miles and will need some work before long and the truck is in need of a few thousand in work. So I'm thinking it makes the most sense to go down to one vehicle and just eat the loss in gas mileage. I'm constantly on the highway, so I generally am seeing 30-33 MPG.
 
  #4  
Old 06-14-2017, 10:05 AM
jthorngate3's Avatar
jthorngate3
jthorngate3 is offline
Postmaster
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Middletown, CT
Posts: 4,753
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Side note, I own both vehicles. Also, I would realistically be able to afford a $10K and under truck without the side work.
 
  #5  
Old 06-14-2017, 10:08 AM
WXboy's Avatar
WXboy
WXboy is offline
Cargo Master
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Central KY
Posts: 3,355
Received 342 Likes on 208 Posts
I have a friend who bought a 2011 Lariat 5.0 supercrew 4x4 with 212,000 miles on it for roughly $12,000 and it feels like a new truck inside and out.

I have a cousin who just bought a 2013 FX4 5.0 supercrew truck with 90,000 miles on it for $25,000. It, too, feels new inside and out.

The prices on these trucks are literally all over the place depending on mileage, but mileage doesn't seem to affect them like it does cars. These trucks are built very rugged to last a long time.

Is it worth paying double the money for a 100,000 mile truck? Probably not. $15,000 can fix a lot of problems.

If it was me, I'd avoid the 5.4 and 4.6L trucks and go with the 5.0L. It's obviously got more horsepower, but it's also more fuel efficient and it's a breeze to access the valve covers, plugs, etc. for future maintenance. The 5.4L trucks are a nightmare. The 5.0L was an improvement all around.

If you decide to shop EcoBoost trucks, look for a '13 or newer as those will have the upgraded vacuum pump, turbos, etc.
 
  #6  
Old 06-14-2017, 11:49 AM
jthorngate3's Avatar
jthorngate3
jthorngate3 is offline
Postmaster
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Middletown, CT
Posts: 4,753
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
I'm a little leary of the earlier 5.0 trucks after reading on some cylinder distortion problems. I'm fairly read up on the 5.4 problems, but didn't realize 4.6 had issues as well. I'd certainly prefer the 5.0 for all reasons you stated though. Just not confident I'll be able to afford one. I wouldn't mind the higher miles, 150K+, if I wasn't going to be driving it daily, and possibly racking up miles depending on the job I'm on.
 
  #7  
Old 06-15-2017, 11:55 AM
AlaskanEx's Avatar
AlaskanEx
AlaskanEx is offline
Bleed Ford Blue

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Anchorage Alaska
Posts: 13,574
Received 128 Likes on 43 Posts
I've never heard a bad word about the 4.6 either 2V or 3V and we have one in the family in a '08 Sport Trac. Other then the fact in the F-150 it can be a bit underpowered in some situations, reliability wise it's awesome.

The later 5.4s 09-10 seem to have a pretty good track record so far and the 6 speed transmission really helping it utilize its power.

Personally if that was my price range I'd be looking at a 4.6 3V with low miles and in great condition, rather then a high mile 2011-up. Hell the first gen electric power steering system alone that has proved to be a bit of an issue is enough to shy me away. But again not every truck has that problem, just like every 5.4 doesn't have cam issues (we had an 04 that was perfect from new until it was sold with 80k miles).
 
  #8  
Old 06-15-2017, 12:09 PM
jthorngate3's Avatar
jthorngate3
jthorngate3 is offline
Postmaster
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Middletown, CT
Posts: 4,753
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Was 2011 the first year of the electric power steering? Or was it with the body change in 09?
 
  #9  
Old 06-15-2017, 12:12 PM
jthorngate3's Avatar
jthorngate3
jthorngate3 is offline
Postmaster
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Middletown, CT
Posts: 4,753
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Or get a 6.2L
 
  #10  
Old 06-15-2017, 04:26 PM
AlaskanEx's Avatar
AlaskanEx
AlaskanEx is offline
Bleed Ford Blue

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Anchorage Alaska
Posts: 13,574
Received 128 Likes on 43 Posts
Originally Posted by jthorngate3
Or get a 6.2L
If your budget was higher that would be my first choice!

Electronic Power Steering came out in 2011 with all the new engines, the only one that did NOT get it was the 6.2.

2009-2010 all still had hydraulic power steering.
 
  #11  
Old 06-16-2017, 08:00 AM
jthorngate3's Avatar
jthorngate3
jthorngate3 is offline
Postmaster
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Middletown, CT
Posts: 4,753
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
6.2's are very hard to find around here that aren't high mileage, high trim. Didn't they make them an option in the lower trims for a couple years? I was pretty sure they did, but I never see them around here. I'm not opposed to traveling to get one. They seem to be very proven to have virtually no big concerns.
 
  #12  
Old 06-16-2017, 09:09 AM
jthorngate3's Avatar
jthorngate3
jthorngate3 is offline
Postmaster
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Middletown, CT
Posts: 4,753
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Umm... http://m.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtml?listingId=450013161&endYear=2 018&zip=06457&keywordPhrases=6.2L&pageLayout=list& keywords=6.2L&maxPrice=20000&mmt=%5BFORD%5BF150PIC KUP%5B%5D%5D%5B%5D%5D&vehicleStyleCodes=TRUCKS&dri veGroup=AWD4WD&sortBy=distanceASC&startYear=2011&e ngineGroup=8CLDR&searchRadius=500
 
  #13  
Old 06-16-2017, 09:10 AM
jthorngate3's Avatar
jthorngate3
jthorngate3 is offline
Postmaster
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Middletown, CT
Posts: 4,753
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
I'm on my phone, so I'll try to fix that later.
 
  #14  
Old 06-16-2017, 12:48 PM
AlaskanEx's Avatar
AlaskanEx
AlaskanEx is offline
Bleed Ford Blue

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Anchorage Alaska
Posts: 13,574
Received 128 Likes on 43 Posts
  #15  
Old 06-16-2017, 06:12 PM
jthorngate3's Avatar
jthorngate3
jthorngate3 is offline
Postmaster
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Middletown, CT
Posts: 4,753
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
The link I tried to post was a 2013 with the 6.2, and I just tried to fix the link and looks like it already sold. It was $20K
 


Quick Reply: Civil opinions wanted.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:14 AM.