The price of new trucks is beyond comprehension!

[BobsYourUncle]

It was 42 years ago today, seems so long ago, yet still a strong memory in my head, a milestone I reached in my humble beginnings into the home renovation industry building solariums and such.

Yes, it was on this day, October ten, nineteen seventy eight when I had been only 4 years into my lifetime career when I worked my way to being able to purchase my first brand new truck!

Yup, 10-10-78 I drove off the lot of Phillips Chev - Olds in Penticton BC driving my nice shiny new 78 Chev 3/4 Ton Camper Special.

As I pulled out of the lot and turned left on to Westminster Ave and headed east towards home, I though I had lost my marbles, that I am a total idiot.

Who in their right mind would pay $7714. For a new truck. All taxes, fees, dealer prep and all the rest of the junk in came to $8,109.70 out the door...... Bob, you are out of your mind! I kept saying to myself. Financed it on the never never plan I did. How will I ever pay for it? I was barely 24 years old.

It was a great truck, I had it for 26 years and about 527,000K on the odometer when I retired it, still in decent shape.

Hmmmmm......

42 years later, my 2007 truck in sig is getting worn out. 408,800K on the clock and I am eyeing the shiny new trucks on the lot.

92 grand $$$$$$$ for something similar with a few more bells and whistles.

No, just no! That's what, about a dozen times the price I paid back then?
Gosh how can they justify that?

Wow! Just wow. Amazing how expensive pickups have become. All these fancy gizzmobops they have, someone has to pay for all that I guess..

Guess I'll just keep fixing what I have. It was $1423.77 yesterday for a water pump and a U-joint. Expensive!

Oh well, that's life! 🙂

My story of the day.

[ShinerBock]

I think it varies depending on what kind of bills you have. I have always followed the 50/30/20 rule. After taxes, no more than 50% should go to fixed bills like house, cars, utilities, and so on. 30% should or can go to wants like eating out, nice clothes, or "toys". 20% should got savings like retirement, investments, or savings account. Some may not be able to make 10% fit within that 50% of fixed bills while others may be able go a little higher because they don't have as many fixed bills as other people.

[BobsYourUncle]

I would think that 10% figure is based on the annual payments rather than the overall price.
10% times however many years of payments to pay off 5he whole thing.

[time2roll]

10%?? So a person making $50,000 should buy a $5,000 vehicle? Need to be making close to a million to get a new top line truck? Wow is that guru out of touch.

Or is that the payment? guru recommends payments?

I recommend the vehicle price should be less than 50% of your annual income.

[4x4ord]

If you make your new truck purchase based on a percentage of your net worth it might be a whole lot easier to justify purchasing new now vs then. One online financial guru says you shouldn’t pay more than %10 of your annual income on purchasing a car. But if that doesn’t work for you consider using your net worth as a barometer. He suggests us in the older crowd can afford to pay up to 5% of our net worth on a new vehicle purchase.

[BobsYourUncle]

My 78 may have only had the 3800 payload, but back then I didn't even know what the ratings were, much less adhere to them.

I used to strip stucco off houses and install aluminum siding.
I remember one time I piled a house full of stucco in the back, a piece of plywood front and back inside my rack, and I heaped it in there until it was over the top of my toolboxes.
Poor old truck was severely sagging in the back, down to the snubbers. Steering was super light.

Went to the dump, weigh in and weigh out, I will never forget that load. I had 3 1/3 tons in the the back of a 3/4 ton truck, 6,680 pounds!
I thought nothing of it, it became a challenge to see how much I could carry. That was the biggest load ever.
That isn't the only time I grossly overloaded it.

Good truck, it just kept on going.

[wowens79]

I bought my first new vehicle in 2002, I was 33, and we found out we had a second child on the way, so I needed a crew cab. Bought a 2002 1500HD LT, which was top of the line back then for $31,000, sticker was $38k.
I'm still driving it, and it has 245K miles on it, and has left me on the side of the road one time. It's been a great truck.

Luckily I've still been making the same $400 car payment into a savings account for the last 14 years. I'm gonna try to get another year of 2 out of it, and buy another. That will hopefully get me to retirement.

I won't be going top of the line, probably will be in the middle of the line with an LT, Bighorn, or XLT gasser and be in the $45-47k range out the door.

[ShinerBock]

blt2ski wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:

blt2ski wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:
$8,109.70 in 1978 is equivalent to $32,329.10 today with inflation which is not too far off from what you can buy a similarly equipped single cab pickup truck today. When I mean similarly equipped, I mean the exact same features, not trim packages. Most trucks were single cab back in those days.

According to GM website, you can get a regular cab 1500 4wd with a 355hp/385lb-ft 5.3L V8 for $32,590 and I bet it has all the same features as the high end trims back in those days. I bet that it also tows more and gets better fuel economy than those trucks did too. So the problem is not that the same trucks apples to apples are more expensive, it is that people want more in their trucks like crew cabs, fancy tech, and power engine options that can tow way more than what trucks can tow back then. Heck, you would have to get a class 6 or 7 truck back then to tow what class 2b and 3 trucks tow today.

A 2500 with a 6l auto trans is closer to 35000 for an equal truck. Yes that 1500 will to more, but still carry half of a reg cab class 2b truck.

The reg cab 1500 I mentioned above is rated at 2100 lbs payload.

But NOT 3800 lbs of payload like the truck bob bought initially. Or my 81, or my 2000 reg cab pickups. Yes it has twice the HP, gears in trans etc. It does not have the payload equal. THAT can be as much of a deciding factor in purchasing truck as the power part! Its no fun having an over powered rig, no payload! Been there done that. Slightly under powered, correct payload is better. COrrectly geared in rear, trans etc is also better in an under powered vs over powered, and wont go anywhere due to incorrect gearing. IE my 89 R3500 with a TH400, 454, and 4.10 rear gears. It would literally stall out on the locl steeper grades here in the Seattle area.

Marty

Oh, I didn't know his 2500 was that much. My dad had a 79 K20. They did not have payload stickers since they were not mandated until after the Explorer/Firestone recalls back in 2000, but it had about 2,500 lbs payload if you subtracted the 7,500 GVWR from the 5,000 lb curb weight.

[blt2ski]

ShinerBock wrote:

blt2ski wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:
$8,109.70 in 1978 is equivalent to $32,329.10 today with inflation which is not too far off from what you can buy a similarly equipped single cab pickup truck today. When I mean similarly equipped, I mean the exact same features, not trim packages. Most trucks were single cab back in those days.

According to GM website, you can get a regular cab 1500 4wd with a 355hp/385lb-ft 5.3L V8 for $32,590 and I bet it has all the same features as the high end trims back in those days. I bet that it also tows more and gets better fuel economy than those trucks did too. So the problem is not that the same trucks apples to apples are more expensive, it is that people want more in their trucks like crew cabs, fancy tech, and power engine options that can tow way more than what trucks can tow back then. Heck, you would have to get a class 6 or 7 truck back then to tow what class 2b and 3 trucks tow today.

A 2500 with a 6l auto trans is closer to 35000 for an equal truck. Yes that 1500 will to more, but still carry half of a reg cab class 2b truck.

The reg cab 1500 I mentioned above is rated at 2100 lbs payload.

But NOT 3800 lbs of payload like the truck bob bought initially. Or my 81, or my 2000 reg cab pickups. Yes it has twice the HP, gears in trans etc. It does not have the payload equal. THAT can be as much of a deciding factor in purchasing truck as the power part! Its no fun having an over powered rig, no payload! Been there done that. Slightly under powered, correct payload is better. COrrectly geared in rear, trans etc is also better in an under powered vs over powered, and wont go anywhere due to incorrect gearing. IE my 89 R3500 with a TH400, 454, and 4.10 rear gears. It would literally stall out on the locl steeper grades here in the Seattle area.

Marty

[ShinerBock]

blt2ski wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:
$8,109.70 in 1978 is equivalent to $32,329.10 today with inflation which is not too far off from what you can buy a similarly equipped single cab pickup truck today. When I mean similarly equipped, I mean the exact same features, not trim packages. Most trucks were single cab back in those days.

According to GM website, you can get a regular cab 1500 4wd with a 355hp/385lb-ft 5.3L V8 for $32,590 and I bet it has all the same features as the high end trims back in those days. I bet that it also tows more and gets better fuel economy than those trucks did too. So the problem is not that the same trucks apples to apples are more expensive, it is that people want more in their trucks like crew cabs, fancy tech, and power engine options that can tow way more than what trucks can tow back then. Heck, you would have to get a class 6 or 7 truck back then to tow what class 2b and 3 trucks tow today.

A 2500 with a 6l auto trans is closer to 35000 for an equal truck. Yes that 1500 will to more, but still carry half of a reg cab class 2b truck.

The reg cab 1500 I mentioned above is rated at 2100 lbs payload.

[gbopp]

A1ARealtorRick wrote:

gbopp wrote:

A1ARealtorRick wrote:

Floridastorm wrote:

Lwiddis wrote:
Flyer, 1965 GTO was the best of the series...I had a LeMans.

1965 to 1967 GTOs. Best cars ever built IMO. 1967 had fuel injection where 1965/66 had Tri Power 4 bbl carburetors. Had a 1967 in 1967 and it was like a fighter plane.

I'm sure you meant tri-power OR 4 bbl carbs, as the tri-power was a 3 2bbl setup.

I don't remember a Pontiac GTO with fuel injection in the 60's?

389 with a single 4bbl or with three 2bbls, that's all. No FI back then.

Maybe the OP was thinking about the 57 Bonneville and 57 Chevy with fuel injection? He did say he was mistaken about the 67 with FI.

[RetiredRealtorR]

gbopp wrote:

A1ARealtorRick wrote:

Floridastorm wrote:

Lwiddis wrote:
Flyer, 1965 GTO was the best of the series...I had a LeMans.

1965 to 1967 GTOs. Best cars ever built IMO. 1967 had fuel injection where 1965/66 had Tri Power 4 bbl carburetors. Had a 1967 in 1967 and it was like a fighter plane.

I'm sure you meant tri-power OR 4 bbl carbs, as the tri-power was a 3 2bbl setup.

I don't remember a Pontiac GTO with fuel injection in the 60's?

389 with a single 4bbl or with three 2bbls, that's all. No FI back then.

[BobsYourUncle]

SDcampowneroperator wrote:
Bob! you traded off your '07 classic lbz diesel. Ive had mine 13 years and 1800000 miles so its just broken in . to sell or trade is not on option.
Lbz's are to become the equivalelet of the '64-66 pontiac 389 superduty in the lemans and GTO
I had a '64 lemans with a '66 GTO 389 6 pack nat. aspirated carb. The coolest chicks getting machine in Dodge City Kansas. in 1971 to 73 It wasnt worth a penny for resale.
Oh but the fun times, the ladies. still have Cindy after all these years-

No, I still have the 07 LBZ, didn't trade it off.
The thought has occured to me when things break, but even my mechanic tells me to keep it, as the LBZ is the best according to him.
I do like some of the options available on the new trucks, but I can't justify the price, especially at 66 and my income has been steadily dropping over the past few years.

I could tell you a cool story about a 66 389 GTO years ago, how I built a 455 for a buddys 73 Grand Am and we had a chew with the GTO, but that's a story for another time! :B

[BobsYourUncle]

NJRVer wrote:

BobsYourUncle wrote:

NJRVer wrote:

BobsYourUncle wrote:
It was 42.....snip

You must have bought.....snip

Nope! It .....

We had the "Big 10" which was a heavy duty half ton. back then the emission exemption was based on weight rating and GM made this Big 10 so it was above the half ton model with all the emission stuff.
The tail pipe even had a blocking screen in the end of it so a sniffer could not be inserted in the exhaust.

🙂 I remember that Big 10. They had a big badge on them identifying the Big 10 model.

[monkey44]

SDcampowneroperator wrote:
Bob! you traded off your '07 classic lbz diesel. Ive had mine 13 years and 1800000 miles so its just broken in . to sell or trade is not on option.
Lbz's are to become the equivalelet of the '64-66 pontiac 389 superduty in the lemans and GTO
I had a '64 lemans with a '66 GTO 389 6 pack nat. aspirated carb. The coolest chicks getting machine in Dodge City Kansas. in 1971 to 73 It wasnt worth a penny for resale.
Oh but the fun times, the ladies. still have Cindy after all these years-

SDcampowner -- So, you put 138,460 miles on it every year since you owned it, and it's still running? That's a lot of miles. 🙂

[SDcampowneroper]

Bob! you traded off your '07 classic lbz diesel. Ive had mine 13 years and 1800000 miles so its just broken in . to sell or trade is not on option.
Lbz's are to become the equivalelet of the '64-66 pontiac 389 superduty in the lemans and GTO
I had a '64 lemans with a '66 GTO 389 6 pack nat. aspirated carb. The coolest chicks getting machine in Dodge City Kansas. in 1971 to 73 It wasnt worth a penny for resale.
Oh but the fun times, the ladies. still have Cindy after all these years-