I should have cancelled my subscription to this thread and then I wouldn't have been compelled to read any more. But here I go.

Couple of things:

I do agree with all y'all that say substance over appearance. That's the way it should be. I don't dispute that. I think some of y'all aren't fully reading my post(I know they are long and tedious, but I do that in the hopes of avoiding confusion of where I stand, unfortunately, that remains to be lost to some).

Second thing, some of y'all that say you don't consider appearance, are actually still considering it. You are just doing it in the opposite direction that I am giving examples of. Rather or not that's good or bad, it depends on the situation.

Here is the kicker, if something that you haven't seen before comes along, your first judgement is going to be based of appearance. From there, based on what you decide from that you either continue to find what substance is there, or you drop the matter. Rather or not you make that right or wrong decision based off of that is another matter.

How many times as guys have we seen a cute girl(what we perceive to be cute, that changes based on the person), then from there decide that we want to strike up a conversation, then depending on that conversation if we want to ask her out on a date, then after that date, another one, so on and so on. The key thing is that the very first thing that is done is based off of appearance and then substance is determined after the appearance, but if the appearance doesn't appeal to you, chances are you aren't going to find out what the substance is. Right or wrong. As men, some appearance is engrained in us from an evolutionary prospective, so while we may not be fully aware of what we are doing, it's there in the back ground.

I'm not saying that judging off of appearance alone is the best thing to do, do not make that mistake(I've tried numerous times to mention that wasn't what I'm saying, I don't know if it will stick this time, but I'm trying again), but I'm saying rather or not you realize it, it is there even if it's just in the background.

Also phillips91 a little more info on the grandfather story. The man was right out of college, zero real world experience, the only thing that he had going for him was his college degree and he was later terminated, 4 months later. That's a little too quick to actually say that he was qualified for the job. But he got it because he had that college degree and my grandfather didn't. Just because you have those pieces of paper, doesn't mean that you know what you are doing. It lends to the thinking that you know(appearance if you will), but it doesn't truly mean that you do.

Appearances do matter, I'm not saying that they should or they shouldn't, but I'm saying that they do play a part. Even some of y'all statements in this thread and other threads have appearance featured heavily, rather you realize or not.

I'm not saying it's the best thing to use as a judging tool, but to an extent we all do it, rather you realize or not, rather you like it or not, you do use it. The only difference is, I accept that(rather I like it or not, rather I think it should be or not, doesn't matter) and I use that little human quirk to my advantage. By your comments phillips you actually used it to your advantage as well a few times.

However, I feel that exactly what I'm trying to say is going to be lost, as people seem to latch on to certain key words and forget the overall context. I doubt I'll ever be able to prove to any of y'all that there is truth there and that's ok, I must not be doing something to terrible wrong, either that or there is somone up there that is really taking pity on me and making sure I don't suffer through life(at all).

With that, I'm going to make sure I cancel my subscription to this thread this time. I'm sure I'll miss some good comments, but that's alright.

 

The difference between the equine shows and the rest of the conversation is that many times the participants in those shows are living in their pickups. It's comparable to a higher end Peterbilt.

It's not so much about appearance, as it is comfort. There is also a very good chance that that is only the travel rig for those horses, and they are normally transported by something a little closer to a base model decade old pickup. A true working pickup will not stay clean whether or not you're careful when using it.

Nobody who buys a pickup to tow with will stand for hauling a bunch of unnecessary accessories that reduce payload.

 

There is no need to cancel your subscription to the thread. No one is arguing or heated with anyone, just having a conversation. We have gotten way off topic, but what thread on here hasn't?

I will agree with you 100% on the girl part lol. If a girl has a good appearance, no matter how bad her actual substance is, I can tolerate her for one night though But when it comes to pouring the foundation of my house or something like that, I couldn't care less what the guy's appearance is. I'm looking to see if he's confident in his answers, if he's on time, if he is reasonably priced, if he's willing to show me examples of his work, etc.

I already knew what I wanted to do with my yard, but every excavator that came out I asked them "what would you do with this yard?" If they said, "um, whatever you want me to" that let me know that they had no conceptual knowledge of what they were doing and I was going to have to babysit them the entire way. If they started talking ideas, what they had done with other yards that were similar, etc, then that let me know that they actually understood what they were doing and why they were doing it. That comes in handy when they run into problems. Regardless of someone's appearance, I always give them the chance to tell me what they are about and why I should hire them.

As for your grandfather, I never actually said the other guy was qualified. All I said was your grandfather didn't have the requirements. That doesn't mean your grandfather couldn't do the job, just the requirements called for a college degree and he didn't have one. If he had a degree, he probably would have gotten the job.

 

Over many years I have grown tired of weeping trans pan gaskets, auto trans filter changes with several gallons of ATF, wearing bands, expensive auto rebuild costs, wandering shift point changes and ever so carefully watching ATF fluid temps when towing with the autos. Understood that all these realities are not seen right away but after a few years and miles they usually seem to start popping up. I really like durability and simplicity when combined with lower maintenance of manuals.

 

I cannot think of any changes made to any manufacturer's car or truck that has contributed to anything other than shareholder value. Ford Super Duties never had the "death wobble" until 1999 when they changed front wheel bearing design to a stacked design to aid in assembly. Never had spark plugs blow out of cylinders or break off routinely before the introduction of the modular engine family. Never had an intake plenum leak coolant from too many heat cycles like the plastic mod motor ones do. Never had head gasket problems with the old 7.3 Power Stroke either. The only way to get Ford to get back to the basics and build things simpler is to not buy their new products until they build what we want. I don't think that collectively the American public is disciplined enough to do that.

 

Truth, well spoken. Long term durability, core strength in design and simplicity. Getting back to basics seems to be the best path to value in my book. Perhaps this path is not sexy enough though for the consuming masses and there is not enough corporate marketing latitude there. Appears the truck upgrade path now endeavors to deliver more crap you don't really need, which in turn creates increasing complexity with increased cost of maintenance and repair. I don't need or want an ever increasing envelope of more HP/Torque and more wing dings and devices installed in the cab.

 

I like this idea, but it could never happen. So few people actually want basic functions and reliability that there is no hope for improvement. Just look at the ridiculous TV advertising and you can see how clueless the average consumer is. They have been duped into working hard to afford all the crap added to current vehicles.

I haven't looked forward to buying a new vehicle in years. After comparing the F250 to everything else, it was the best I could find. Considering this is the best the auto industry can do, they really need to improve.

 

Looking a little deeper, the F250's C channel chassis, twin I beam IFS in the 4X2, Sterling rear LSD axle, non proprietary double din stereo port and especially it's real 5spd auto are some truck basics that steered me back to Ford. I'm hoping with fingers crossed that Ford doesn't do away with these qualities in favor of 3/4 ton "cars" like the other two offer. It rides better and is more comfortable than my previous truck and I'm happy with it's gas mileage. I hope Ford doesn't neuter it altogether like they did the F150 in my humble opinion.

 

I am just about ready to start looking for an older (94-96) F250 crew cab short bed to restore to use for my towing needs. I think that would be cheaper and a better value in the long term as long as I can get it insured for the appraised value instead of blue book or whatever insurance adjusters are using these days.

 

I agree, people are getting lazier, don't want to shift for themselves. The torqshift is an awesome tranny, seems to know what gear to be in at all times, but sometimes picking your own gears is more fun and beneficial.
IMHO it is heresy for certain vehicles to be automatic ( Mustang 5.0L's, etc.
and could you imagine a \porsche 911 or ferrari with an automatic???

 

I'm having fun with my manual. I can turn corners gracefully without using the brakes. One complaint is that the ratios are not evenly spaced: 3rd to 2nd is the biggest jump. Have to rev the engine up 1000 rpms more to shift from 3rd to 2nd, more if you're above 2000 rpms, less if you're below 1500 rpms. Each gear requires a different downshift preparation. The computer also pulls the truck down to idle which is a bonus for engine braking. Delayed response for instant revving takes a while to learn so you're punching the gas before you're out of gear to have the engine rev in neutral.

 

Sadly, the base tranny for most Ferrari's is an auto now.

 

Same thing with the fastest 911.

 

I'm sure the new autos like the Ferrari's have are a heck of a lot better for performance than any manual. They don't have torque converters(so no power loss), less clutches to wear out, dual clutch design(much faster shift with no power loss during the shift), etc. Nobody in a manual is going to have a faster or better shift than that. But it takes the fun and skill aspects out of driving it when my grandmother can run the same time and get just as fast a shift as the world's best driver.

 

I know that for racing its an advantage, but I would rather have the manual for street driving and fun at the strip.

Just more fun to thrown a shifter around and try to do it a little better and make your times a little better each pass.

With the auto and launch control it takes all the fun out, or at least most of it.

Kind of the slow car fast/fast car slow thing.lol