Tripel Axel

[Rope-Pusher]

Chrysler’s Ram Considers More Sports Team Edition Trucks
By Mark Clothier - Mar 28, 2013 10:42 AM ET
Chrysler Group LLC is considering expanding its successful Ram truck promotional tie-in with Detroit’s professional hockey team to other sports and cities, Fred Diaz, head of the Ram truck brand, said.
Ram sold about 3,000 of the Red Wings edition of the Ram 1500, which went on sale in November 2011, triple what the company expected, Diaz said in an interview yesterday at the New York auto show.

3000 units isn't bad considering it was specific to one team and they didn't offer them this year, what with the NHL strike and all.


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-2 ... rucks.html

[ClutchFork]

Funny how so many years after the surburbanites started driving pickups, the pickup morphed into an SUV with a small token bed in the back. When I started driving pickups (1977) only sportsmen and contractors had pickups. You bought a pickup and friends came out of the woodwork needing something hauled someplace or other. Now the suburban home is not complete (as far as keeping up withe the Jones') unless there is a honking big truck sitting in the driveway, and lately it has to have a monstrously huge grill.

[AHTOXA]

As Jack and I engage on our long evening walks through the neighborhood, every driveway has crew cab 4x4 short bed 1500 truck in the highest or second highest trim. This is a pretty wealthy area.

[tankinbeans]

We mustn't forget about the hideous lift kits.

[Rope-Pusher]

We mustn't forget about the hideous lift kits.

Fickset

[six]

[theholycow]

We mustn't forget about the hideous lift kits.

You mean the ones on shiny, unmarred trucks with (relatively) low profile tires, where if you asked what trails they use they'd be like "OMG can't scratch my truck or get it muddy!"?

[tankinbeans]

We mustn't forget about the hideous lift kits.

You mean the ones on shiny, unmarred trucks with (relatively) low profile tires, where if you asked what trails they use they'd be like "OMG can't scratch my truck or get it muddy!"?

Those would be the ones. Trucks in general have gotten too tall. I assume it's because they need the beefy suspension for the 10 people who do trucky things with their trucks, but otherwise who wants to lift some bigars package above navel level. Talk about back problems.

[theholycow]

I assume it's because they need the beefy suspension for the 10 people who do trucky things with their trucks, but otherwise who wants to lift some bigars package above navel level. Talk about back problems.

Negatory. The extra height of modern trucks is mainly cosmetic, to sell to people who don't need to lift stuff into the bed. While it does correlate with increased capacity, the extra height is not necessary for that capacity. It's annoying for loading the truck, as well as installing plows (which need longer brackets that put more leverage on the truck frame) and trailer hitches (which need deep drop drawbars -- again, more leverage). It's not the end of the world and it does tend to look nice but it's not made for function.

Additionally I think bed walls are higher than they used to be, possibly as a result of the ever-shorter bed lengths available still needing to be useful as well as cosmetic purposes.

Oh, and on the subject of loading: Liquid-applied bedliners with grippy rubbery surfaces must make one-man loading of heavy items difficult. With a plastic bedliner (or no bedliner) I can slide stuff in that I can't even lift, then strap it to prevent it sliding around...

[ClutchFork]

Trucks in general have gotten too tall. I assume it's because they need the beefy suspension for the 10 people who do trucky things with their trucks, but otherwise who wants to lift some bigars package above navel level. Talk about back problems.

Seems to have started with the Chevy Avalanche and all the lemming auto manufacturers followed along. The purpose is sales and the consumer appeal presumably is the desire to have a vehicle they can intimidate other drivers with.

[tankinbeans]

Trucks in general have gotten too tall. I assume it's because they need the beefy suspension for the 10 people who do trucky things with their trucks, but otherwise who wants to lift some bigars package above navel level. Talk about back problems.

Seems to have started with the Chevy Avalanche and all the lemming auto manufacturers followed along. The purpose is sales and the consumer appeal presumably is the desire to have a vehicle they can intimidate other drivers with.

You're probably right. I guess I've never done much research because I've never had a need for a pickup and have not wanted to pay to run a vehicle that I would never use for its intended purpose - or if I did use it, it would be rarely.

Is the Avalanche even considered a truck? I thought it was a unibody with a piddling bed, similar to the Honda Ridgeline (which people also pan because it's effectively an Accord with a trucky bed.)

Negatory. The extra height of modern trucks is mainly cosmetic, to sell to people who don't need to lift stuff into the bed.

Shows how much I know. I know that when it comes to hauling and towing you need good suspension and tires, but I don't know what "good" means. I hear McPherson struts, dual coil-over, leafspring and it usually hits my ears like the adults from Peanuts and the Gang.

[theholycow]

Is the Avalanche even considered a truck? I thought it was a unibody with a piddling bed, similar to the Honda Ridgeline (which people also pan because it's effectively an Accord with a trucky bed.)

The Avalanche is most closely related to the Suburban/Tahoe/Yukon and is body-on-frame. The body's structure was originally taken from the Suburban and modified. There is an old rarely-used definition of "unibody" that would fit because the bed and cab are a single continuous body unit, unlike a traditional pickup whose bed is completely separate from the body. The bed is very small, and it would not be useful for a serious pickup user, although its midgate (if it still has that, I know it did at first) allowed you to fold down the back seat and get a full-sized 8 foot bed (obviously with less access than a real pickup).

I don't think the Avalanche started the truck height arms race. I don't remember it being any higher than its GMC/Chevy sibling SUVs/pickups on the same platform at any time. The Ford Explorer Sport Trac was an early SUV/pickup crossover with a dinky little bed and a lot of extra height (as well as the tall bed walls that I described before) but I don't think it was to blame either.

I think it happened as a result of the 1500 models having been differentiated from the 2500 and 3500 models. They used to have identical styling and bodies, from all 3 manufacturers. The 2500/3500 models were a little taller (not a lot). Then people started buying full-sized pickups as status symbols or road user intimidators, with those wanting the most impressively tall truck buying a 2500 or 3500 for the moderate extra height, and a number of things happened, including but not limited to:
- Towing and hauling capacity arms races
- 1500 became very visually distinct from 2500/3500
- General luxuriousness added
- Price skyrocketed

Once all that happened and the 1500 was being made for a different market, it had to be lifted for that market (and to hell with the rest). You can't have your 1500 higher than your 2500/3500 so those got lifted too.

[tankinbeans]

An even dumber version of that designer abortion would be the Hummer with a bed in which you could probably for a pack of gum.

[theholycow]

I will give all these crew cab microbed "trucks" credit for one possible use, though. Add a tonneau, turning the bed into a trunk, and they are decent big RWD sedans the likes of which you haven't been able to get in decades. Granted, there are good reasons why those don't exist anymore...

[Squint]

Fun fact, lifting a truck voids any kind of manufacturer warranty. The dealership had a complaint the other day from a guy who had a lifted Tundra but they wouldn't fix under warranty.