Forum Discussion
bucky wrote:
Anytime an owner moves to another state and titles it in that new state CarFax records it as a new owner as they are following the VIN not the person.
Not true. I moved from NY to KY and back to NY, re-titling the burb both times and the Carfax shows as one owner.- If you have a wreck or major mechanical repair and fix it yourself, it doesn’t show up on carfax either. The last car I sold had quite a bit of front end damage when I hit a pig, I fixed it myself and it wasn’t on car fax. The car I have now has obviously had the rear bumper replaced (doesn’t quite match) and it had a clear car fax, most people would never notice the replaced bumper, but I’m the sunlight almost everyone I show can see it.
I wouldn’t pay for or trust a car fax report, I trust my own senses much better. bucky wrote:
ktosv wrote:
$35k for a 20 year old Michigan vehicle for sale in North Carolina? It better show that it was owned by a snowbird and didn’t spend any time in Michigan from Nov through the end of March!!
The dealer has it advertised as a one owner, but the car fax shows two owners and two accidents.
Anytime an owner moves to another state and titles it in that new state CarFax records it as a new owner as they are following the VIN not the person.
Not to mention I don't belive in Carfax. They have recorded wrong info for years. I for one dislike Carfax. It's being used for its intended purpose which was for information in buying a used car. It's now being used to devalue cars.ktosv wrote:
$35k for a 20 year old Michigan vehicle for sale in North Carolina? It better show that it was owned by a snowbird and didn’t spend any time in Michigan from Nov through the end of March!!
The dealer has it advertised as a one owner, but the car fax shows two owners and two accidents.
Anytime an owner moves to another state and titles it in that new state CarFax records it as a new owner as they are following the VIN not the person.- Wow its a 35k suburban? I bought an 02 7.3L because my mechanic friends said its a great choice for a budget tow vehicle. I use it as a daily driver. Like another guy said they sure do have a cult following. I get 18-20mpg driving like a slow poke. Around 10-12 towing also driving like a slow poke.
- "Love affair with old diesels."
valhalla360 wrote:
Bionic Man wrote:
I just don't get the love affair with the old diesels (of every flavor). Sure, they were impressive when they were made - but that was 20 years ago.
In both performance and economy, the 3.5 EcoBoost (or Hemi or 6.2 for that matter) are just flat out better engines than a old 5.9 or 7.3.
And that doesn't even scratch the surface of the upgrades inside the vehicles - touchscreen radios, adaptive cruise, park assist, lane assist, CarPlay......that are included on the new vehicles. Sure some you can add, but not all of them.
Sorry. Hard pass on something like this. Especially at this price.
As I mentioned, financially, it doesn't make a lot of sense.
But, they don't offer the 3.5Ecoboost in a 3/4 ton platform but even then, the 7.3 actually is better for efficiency (Our F250 with 7.3 got low 20's MPG with 13 MPG towing a 5th wheel) and they are proven to last pretty much...forever.
Only place the newer engines really win is peak horse power. Load up the ecoboost with a big trailer and expect 8-9mpg towing if you are lucky.
As far as other upgrades beyond the engine...that's why I suggested a transplant and suspension upgrade. Of course touchscreens and parking assist aren't high priorities in a tow vehicle for many.
Sorry, but your position is hard to justify. The only real place the diesel Excursion has an advantage is tow rating (11,000 vs 9,200 in the current Expedition). Payload is the same. It probably would get better MPG towing, but it wouldn’t even be close in no towing MPG. The current full size SUVs would be MUCH more pleasurable to drive towing or not.
And if you don’t think the upgraded electronics are an advantage in a tow vehicle, I’d be curious if you ever really have experienced them.
Even if this was only a dedicated tow vehicle, I’d still go with one of the more modern Expeditions or Burbs. Especially when it wouldn’t take much more $ to get into one vs this Excursion.- My father still has his 2001 F250 with a 7.3L that has over 350k on it. I have towed with it many times. The mpg computer is waaayyyy off compared to actual. It will generally say 18-20, but actual is 13-14 mpg which makes sense since Fuelly has it at 13.9 mpg combined average with 99 vehicles and 1.6 million miles tracked. My dad used to tell people that he got 18-20 mpg until I showed him his actual numbers.
I also used to have an F150 HD Ecoboost with a 6-speed. Fords algorithm they used to compute mpg must have gotten way better because it would say I was getting 16-17 mpg while I was actually getting 15-16 mpg. So going by the computers in both trucks, you would think my F150 Ecoboost was getting worst fuel economy, but in reality my Dad's 7.3L PSD was getting worst fuel mileage. It even gets worse fuel mileage than my Ram 2500 CTD(both stock and tuned), and my brother's old 2012 6.7L PSD even though the computer says it gets better mpg.
Towing the same trailer, the 7.3L gets about 1 mpg better than the Ecoboost but it it is kind of hard to calculate because it is very rare that we would tow the same trailer for a full tank so conditions were never the same. Towing performance was a lot better with the Ecoboost, but that is to be expected with over 100 more horsepower and two extra gears for better torque multiplication. Since it was an HD F150, it handled the load about the same if not a little better. I would hands down go with F150 Ecoboost if given the choice between the two especially since I was unloaded more than I was loaded and it got about two mpg better unloaded with a lot more power. Bionic Man wrote:
I just don't get the love affair with the old diesels (of every flavor). Sure, they were impressive when they were made - but that was 20 years ago.
In both performance and economy, the 3.5 EcoBoost (or Hemi or 6.2 for that matter) are just flat out better engines than a old 5.9 or 7.3.
And that doesn't even scratch the surface of the upgrades inside the vehicles - touchscreen radios, adaptive cruise, park assist, lane assist, CarPlay......that are included on the new vehicles. Sure some you can add, but not all of them.
Sorry. Hard pass on something like this. Especially at this price.
As I mentioned, financially, it doesn't make a lot of sense.
But, they don't offer the 3.5Ecoboost in a 3/4 ton platform but even then, the 7.3 actually is better for efficiency (Our F250 with 7.3 got low 20's MPG with 13 MPG towing a 5th wheel) and they are proven to last pretty much...forever.
Only place the newer engines really win is peak horse power. Load up the ecoboost with a big trailer and expect 8-9mpg towing if you are lucky.
As far as other upgrades beyond the engine...that's why I suggested a transplant and suspension upgrade. Of course touchscreens and parking assist aren't high priorities in a tow vehicle for many.
