This is my 2000 model. Currently sitting at 470,000 mi. Straight stock and all original, even injectors and has god only knows how many more hours of idling time on it. If I were leaving tomorrow to drag a trailer across country that drivers seat is where I would be sitting. I promise you if it blew up tomorrow it would get another motor but it runs like new, no smoke, no oil consumption just steady humming. Affectionately around my house she is known as Daddy’s girlfriend!
2003 F350 only 3,700 original miles
- Thread starter Ouachita
- Start date
chevytaHOE5674
Well-known member
My 99 has 270k miles. Had a snowplow on it most of its life. Box rotted off, floors are patched, cab corners and rockers are gone, fuel tank cross members rotted away, frame is starting to sag/bow in the middle, etc. But it always starts and puts in work, pretty much always has a trailer or plow on it. Would drive it across the country if I need to. Truck doesn't owe me a dime.
I also have a 2000 crew cab with 117k with no rust and clean as a whistle. It gets steam cleaned in the fall then parked until spring. Only way to make a vehicle last in the rust belt is to park them for the winter.
I also have a 2000 crew cab with 117k with no rust and clean as a whistle. It gets steam cleaned in the fall then parked until spring. Only way to make a vehicle last in the rust belt is to park them for the winter.
Attachments
Travlr
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2022
- Messages
- 8,990
- City & State/Province
- NW Arkansas, W South Dakota, retired in Utah
I had a friend that spent a lot of time at the Bonneville Salt Flats helping run the time trials, and he drove a Metro. When he came home the car was caked with salt. He'd put the car on a gravel driveway with a sprinkler under it for about three days, moving the car back and forth a couple of times a day, and when he sold it about ten years ago it didn't show any obvious rust.
I have a Toyota Tacoma and they are famous for frames rusting out in the rust belt. Toyota even did a warranty replacement on the frames, swapping them out at no charge for years.
I don't understand why the public puts up with salt on their roads in the rust belt, and the resulting loss of value in their vehicles. There is plenty of snow out west and the vehicles don't rust out.
chevytaHOE5674
Well-known member
Road salt is a love/hate relationship. Love what it does to the roads but hate what it does to the vehicles. Without it we wouldn't see pavement November thru April.
Im not sure how they treat their roads out west in deep snow country?
Im not sure how they treat their roads out west in deep snow country?
Travlr
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2022
- Messages
- 8,990
- City & State/Province
- NW Arkansas, W South Dakota, retired in Utah
I know they use sand. Maybe some other kinds of chemicals? I don't know either, but while there is some rust it's nothing that would rot a frame. I have a '78 Chevy I'm doing a frame swap into a military vehicle and after wire brushing it and paint it looks like new.
chevytaHOE5674
Well-known member
They use sand here. But at cold temps it turns into bricks, so they mix it with salt to get it into a spreadable product.
Travlr
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2022
- Messages
- 8,990
- City & State/Province
- NW Arkansas, W South Dakota, retired in Utah
Well something is different. Whatever it is results in 50+ year old vehicles with very little rust.
We just gave my 2016 F250 Platinum to my stepson - with a whopping 37K miles. And yup, my new truck is a King Ranch. But Mr TC figured I earned it after dealing with the absolute hell of last year.
I had a '97 F250 7.3 powerstroke back in 1998-2001 and traded it for a 2001 Dodge/Cummins. The Powerstroke was nice but I honestly don't understand all the hoopla with them. Power wasn't that great and even 60,000 miles it had oil leaks, Cold start issues, and smelled like diesel burning all the time. Also had the crankshaft position sensor fail a few times. The 250 and 350 trucks of that year were tough though. Still have a 1996 regular cab 4x4 F250 with the 5.8L and a bale bed on it. It's a back up and I guess we'll keep it forever at this point.
A big difference between a 97 and an 02 with 6 spd. power wise especially towing. I like the motors and have had stellar performance out of all that I have owned. I wouldn’t tell anybody they make the most power but they made good power.
For me those years it was the overall truck set up. Great chassis and overall durability and the cloth seats 02-04 wore like iron and craddled your hind end and legs like a mothers love. The most comfortable trucks I have ever driven over long distance. They pulled good for what they were also especially with a 3.73 rear.
If I were a great mechanic an 04 swapped with a 5.9 Cummins that was perked up a bit would be hard to beat.
I had a 97 crew cab Powerstroke, 4 x 4 with 5 speed manual. And at the same time, I had a 99 crew cab Powerstroke 4 x4, but it had a 6 speed manual. Had the same programmer on both trucks. The 99 pulled a little stronger, and I figured it was due to the transmission. My GF at the time, had a 2500 Dodge Cummins 4 x4, with an automatic trans. That Dodge would pull what the Fords would...just slow as hell. I'd take it up Mont Eagle with a 4-horse LQ trailer, and it would get down and lug like a tractor, but would eventually get us to the top. The 99 Ford especially, I could sometimes up shift pulling the same load.
Last edited:
Yep. My son, a diesel mechanic, says his ideal truck would be a Ford F350 SD, with a Cummins motor and that Allison transmission.
Travlr
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2022
- Messages
- 8,990
- City & State/Province
- NW Arkansas, W South Dakota, retired in Utah
I talked to a kid that was swapping a Cummins into a Ford, but never saw him after the truck ran. I should see if I can find him. I'd like to know how it came out.
He's a smart man.We just gave my 2016 F250 Platinum to my stepson - with a whopping 37K miles. And yup, my new truck is a King Ranch. But Mr TC figured I earned it after dealing with the absolute hell of last year.
It’s the gearing in that ZF6 trans. A 7.3 PS is a turd with an automatic, a bit of a dog with a 5spd. and a damn good pulling motor with the 6sp. It needs that extra gear at the bottom to get the top 5 to stack right. 3.73 rears make a big difference too. It puts you with a lower gear at the trans which gives the motor better power and keeps it in that sweet spot RPM wise much like a tractor trailer. My 3.73 truck will pull circles around the others I have had with lower ratios.
chevytaHOE5674
Well-known member
I own one of each currently and I always thought the zf6 truck felt quicker with a load until my brother loaned me his Dragy GPS box that measures 0-60 and 1/8mi times. Loaded up with the same trailer the 4r100 and zf6 truck run nearly the same times. Both are 3.73 equipped.
Maybe so, I would buy that but I bet motor telemetry is not the same especially off the line and there is more to how a truck pulls than times.
kenny thomas
Well-known member
Forget the 3.73 for pulling in the hills. Get a 4.10.
The new trucks pull and stop so much better than the older trucks. There's really no comparison. The downside is they are expensive. Guy here at work did buy a new F350 4 door 4x4 XL model diesel for $61,000 earlier this year though. It's nice for an XL model though. I'd compare it to an XLT 10 yrs ago. I know $61k sounds like allot but compared to what things cost now days.......
A lot of people think that. I have had both, the 3.73s on that motor trans combo will way outperform a 4.10. Puts it right in the power band for that motor and a motor will pull better with a lower gear at the trans. and a higher gear at the rear than vise versa. Look at the ratios on a road tractor sometime. Back in the day gear count was low in the transmission so they made up for lost power by a lower rear.
