Conversation
Notices
-
Embed this notice
I'll take a $20k s10 with no ac, I'm not trying to ask for too much
-
Embed this notice
There is some truth there
But the reality is Ford allowed the original, once-great Ranger to languish in an unimproved state for years while Toyota ate their lunch because they were way more interested in chasing high-margin big pickups
And GM is no better
-
Embed this notice
I don't really mind a very long-lived design as long as it's a good design. My dad has a '98 S10, and it's a good truck that is still chugging right along with over 300,000 miles on it, but there's not much about it that I consider an improvement over my old square body. And the few things that are improvements are direct bolt-on upgrades to the old trucks because they have the same basic chassis. Mine had 2nd Gen Blazer 4 wheel disc brakes and ZQ8 suspension, for example. I could out-handle a lot of sports cars.
I had AC that kept me cool in Florida, I got 28 mpg, I could haul pretty much anything I actually wanted to haul, I had a decent stereo, and it was fun to drive. It started easy and was reliable. I wouldn't hesitate to get in it with just fluid and tire pressure checks and drive across the country. I had all that without a CAN bus or 58x ignition system.
What has the Colorado, which replaced the S10, improved on? Higher payload capacity? I didn't need it, and if I did, I'd get a full size. If GM was still building the 80's-style S10 today, I'd still be interested in buying one.
I don't know. Maybe I'm just getting curmudgeonly in my old age.
-
Embed this notice
I've still got a garage full of parts for my square body S10 that got squished by a 40,000lb oak tree. I'm trying to save up to buy another one now if other stuff would stop demanding money of me.
I honestly don't think it's corporate greed. GM would build and sell so many base S10s that they'd make their money. But they're getting spit roasted by government regulations on one side and outrageous legacy UAW costs on the other. Even the general shape of the car is mandated by government regulations on making it more survivable for pedestrians who get hit when they go wandering around in the street. Americans yearn for simple and inexpensive options, but it's the government preventing their import and manufacture here. So people buy side-by-sides and golf carts instead and then lobby their local governments to make them de facto street legal.
Meanwhile the Japanese manufacturers don't have to pay those labor costs and the Japanese government has traditionally paid for a lot of their R&D. Plus they built their industry on outright stolen tech--Toyota's reputation for reliable engines came from stealing designs from US and English manufacturers. Their first straight 6 was reverse engineered from the Chevy stove bolt six. The 4AGE is a reverse engineered Ford Cosworth BDA.
-
Embed this notice
The first new vehicle I bought as an adult was a stripped S10
4 cylinder, bench seat, manual transmission, crank windows
I loved that truck
Pure corporate greed and corruption keep us from having such simple and affordable options
-
Embed this notice
@jb @tiddlywinkler there are a lot of storied about this - a few good books too. The US Government basically fucked the domestics over for a long time and made them compete at a loss against Toyota.
They had their own self-inflicted wounds for sure, but the feds did nothing to help.
Add CAFE on top of it, and it is pretty much a done deal.
-
Embed this notice
@HonkHonkBoom it's probably mostly our dumb CAFE, and Californa CARB rules
-
Embed this notice
@sickburnbro we could have so much better , it's out there, but they just wont let us have them because they're greedy fucks that hate us.