90's Trucks

"Thunderface" (thunderface) 01/04/2015 at 22:03 • Filed to: trucks

12

45

Are boxy and cool. Nuff said

Denver Is Stuck In The 90s > Thunderface 01/04/2015 at 22:05

2

Yup

norskracer98-ExploringTheOutback > Thunderface 01/04/2015 at 22:11

2

That Chevy though...

Logansteno: Bought a VW? > Thunderface 01/04/2015 at 22:12

3

90s trucks are best trucks.

God I want a first-gen S10 Blazer...

Denver Is Stuck In The 90s > Logansteno: Bought a VW? 01/04/2015 at 22:13

0

I want a first gen S10 so bad, but the engine choices are terrible

Logansteno: Bought a VW? > Denver Is Stuck In The 90s 01/04/2015 at 22:14

0

The 4.3? Hell, even the 2.8 isn't terrible. The iron duke I4 on the other hand? Hell no.

Denver Is Stuck In The 90s > Logansteno: Bought a VW? 01/04/2015 at 22:16

1

But ford had better engine choices in the day, thats why I got a ranger. I quit looking at S10s once I realized I didnt like the engines. Its a shame really because The S10 looks ages better than the ranger by comparison

blacktruck18 > Thunderface 01/04/2015 at 22:17

1

I fully support this post. Both of these were mine. I really miss that Tahoe.

Branden J -Reading the Manual > Thunderface 01/04/2015 at 22:18

2

I've got a boxy 90s truck!

Logansteno: Bought a VW? > Denver Is Stuck In The 90s 01/04/2015 at 22:18

0

Trust me, the 4.3 would have been more than perfect. The exact same engine resides in my way heavier Safari and it's perfectly capable. Slow, but capable. And dead reliable.

Did you ever drive a 4.3 S10?

blacktruck18 > Denver Is Stuck In The 90s 01/04/2015 at 22:19

0

http://www.jegs.com/p/Trans-Dapt/H…

The engine choices are awesome. V8 swap all the things.

Thunderface > Branden J -Reading the Manual 01/04/2015 at 22:20

0

sweet!

norskracer98-ExploringTheOutback > Denver Is Stuck In The 90s 01/04/2015 at 22:21

0

The 4.3 wasn't a bad engine at all.

Branden J -Reading the Manual > Thunderface 01/04/2015 at 22:21

0

285,000 miles and still looking beautiful!

Fairlame > Thunderface 01/04/2015 at 22:22

3

wouldnt trade my 96 for any newer truck

Thunderface > Branden J -Reading the Manual 01/04/2015 at 22:23

0

indeed

Denver Is Stuck In The 90s > Logansteno: Bought a VW? 01/04/2015 at 22:23

0

No I haven't driven one. Didn't the 4.3 get like 10mpg though?

lone_liberal > Thunderface 01/04/2015 at 22:23

3

They also have reasonably sized grills and headlights.

Logansteno: Bought a VW? > Denver Is Stuck In The 90s 01/04/2015 at 22:24

0

Yeah, if you thrashed the shit out of it like I constantly do. They're capable of way better.

How can you say it's a bad motor if you haven't ever driven a vehicle with one? Torquey little sumbitch, it is.

Branden J -Reading the Manual > Thunderface 01/04/2015 at 22:27

1

To be honest even though it was cheaper I like the single headlight chevy front ends from the W/Ts better

(The Bowtie is back in mine, I had just painted the grille before the picture)

Denver Is Stuck In The 90s > Logansteno: Bought a VW? 01/04/2015 at 22:31

0

It's not a bad motor, rather its a bad motor for me. I need at least a semblance of MPGs

Birddog > lone_liberal 01/04/2015 at 22:32

3

Hell, the entire truck is reasonably sized.

Logansteno: Bought a VW? > Denver Is Stuck In The 90s 01/04/2015 at 22:35

0

Cause I'm sure a 4.0L Cologne is getting stellar numbers...

Denver Is Stuck In The 90s > Logansteno: Bought a VW? 01/04/2015 at 22:38

0

Hey I said I wanted MPGs. Doesn't mean I listen to myself. I really wanted a 4cyl, but man I love my engine. When gas prices get more expensive I may have to do something

Logansteno: Bought a VW? > Denver Is Stuck In The 90s 01/04/2015 at 22:46

0

You just totally eliminated the only reason why the 4.3 was "bad motor" for you.

4 cylinder trucks seem so wrong to me. Unless that 4 pot is of diesel variety, it's going to be a gutless motor with no torque.

I've said it before, if you're going to drive a truck, you gotta commit to bad gas mileage, prices low or high.

BeaterGT > Thunderface 01/04/2015 at 22:46

2

I know a guy that would kill for the 2-door boxy Tahoe

Denver Is Stuck In The 90s > Logansteno: Bought a VW? 01/04/2015 at 22:50

0

Basically ya, lol. But I got a barn find low mileage pickup out of that backwards thinking. I really should do a lenghty post on it, It really is truly remarkable how good of shape its in

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > Thunderface 01/04/2015 at 22:53

2

Especially with a 454 and 7 original miles

Logansteno: Bought a VW? > Denver Is Stuck In The 90s 01/04/2015 at 22:54

0

Doesn't it have like over 100k on it? Barn find and that many miles don't usually go together. Well taken care of would be a better term.

Denver Is Stuck In The 90s > Logansteno: Bought a VW? 01/04/2015 at 22:56

0

Its a barn find because of the records. Its at 104k miles, but I have meticulously kept records dating back to 9/93. The thing was at 48k miles in 2005.

DoYouEvenShift > Thunderface 01/04/2015 at 22:58

3

Sampsonite24-Earth's Least Likeliest Hero > Thunderface 01/04/2015 at 22:59

1

And then they started rounding them off towards the end of the decade

Pictured is my old dakota that I miss so much

also that first black ford is that a first gen lightning?

Logansteno: Bought a VW? > Denver Is Stuck In The 90s 01/04/2015 at 23:00

0

I still don't think that qualifies as a bard find. Those are usually rare, old cars that were parked and left there for a loong time. Yours is more like a well taken care of truck whose owner was meticulous with their record keeping. That's like me calling the Safari a barn find because we have records in it dating back to the day my parents bought it.

Thunderface > Sampsonite24-Earth's Least Likeliest Hero 01/04/2015 at 23:00

0

yes it is. Me gusta

Thunderface > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 01/04/2015 at 23:00

1

lol

Denver Is Stuck In The 90s > Logansteno: Bought a VW? 01/04/2015 at 23:02

0

Eh youre probably right. I think we just have different definitions of barn find. But you have to agree 104k is incredibly low miles for a 21 year old truck. Also the original owner logged when he waxed it in the mileage book, Who does that level of record keeping?

shop-teacher > Denver Is Stuck In The 90s 01/04/2015 at 23:37

1

The 4.0 and 4.3 might as well be the same engine. They both made roughly the same power, got roughly the same mpg, and were bullet-proof reliable.

You did well on your Ranger, but if you ever find a square body S-10 that tickles your fancy, so long as it has the 4.3, go for it.

shop-teacher > BeaterGT 01/04/2015 at 23:39

0

Yeah, me too. They're all rusted out and over-priced around here.

JeepJeremy > norskracer98-ExploringTheOutback 01/04/2015 at 23:58

1

My pop had a 97 z71 off road. It was pewter. He let me drive it to my senior prom. Gorgeous truck!!!

JeepJeremy > Fairlame 01/04/2015 at 23:58

0

damn that's sick!!!!!!!!

AdverseMartyr > Thunderface 01/05/2015 at 01:05

1

Your premise seems valid.

ly2v8-Brian > Logansteno: Bought a VW? 01/05/2015 at 01:25

0

I had the 2200 in my S10 (Pushrod 4cyl FTW!), backed by a 4 speed auto. It sure as hell wasn't a sportscar but I never felt like I was really hurting for power. Helps when you don't have pointless addons like 4x4 weighing you down. The truck empty weighed about 1 1/2 to 3/4 tons.

ly2v8-Brian > Thunderface 01/05/2015 at 01:28

0

Had Too :)

Wurrwulf > Thunderface 01/05/2015 at 11:24

1

and 100 more > Sampsonite24-Earth's Least Likeliest Hero 01/05/2015 at 17:26

0

It's okay, Dakotas were still boxy early on!

and 100 more > Thunderface 01/05/2015 at 17:28

1

This thread needs more Dakota.