Unless I’m mistaken, you can still buy an F-150 with a naturally aspirated engine
As a kid in the late 1940s and early 1950s, I thought it was terrible when truck manufacturers moved the gearshift from the floor to the steering column. In 1953, I thought it was blasphemy to the truck world when GMC and Ford offered automatic transmissions in their 1/2 ton pickups. What self respecting pickup truck owner would want an automatic transmission? Now, half ton pickup trucks aren’t even available with manual transmissions. What is a geezer like me supposed to do if you can’t buy a real man’s truck with a manual transmission?
1 Like
I think your are trying to make a joke . My neighbor has a full service lawn service. His truck has automatic transmission , auto temp , power steering , heated seats ( for those cold winters when he is removing snow from parking lots ) plus other creature comforts. With auto trans he doesn’t have to fight the clutch and brake pedal to back his trailer with all the gear he needs to do a lawn.
1 Like
Sounds like my Civic. It’s an eyesore, but it keeps on running.
All Joking aside…Automatics are stronger then manuals and can easily haul.tow more. The weakest link in a manual is the clutch.
You need a REAL full size truck: the International XT series. They were built from 2004 to 2007.
1 Like
I remember those. Saw one once too.
Automatic transmissions in trucks have vastly improved since they were introduced in pickup trucks in 1953. Dodge even used the Chrysler “lift and clunk” semi-automatic transmissions in delivery vans about 1950. I have to admit that the automatic transmission makes driving in traffic easier.
When I was in junior high school I thought it would make sense for school buses to have automatic transmissions but this was unheard of back in the mid 1950s. Now almost all school buses are automatics. City buses were equipped with some type of automatic transmissions back in the late 1940s.
Back in 1973 when I had a five acres in the country, I bought a 14 horsepower yard tractor and I chose one with a hydrostatic transmission for ease of use. It allowed me to.keep the engine running at a higher speed for the mower, but keep the ground speed at a slower pace.
What I find interesting is that back in the 1950s, the debate was whether it was better to have a transmission that depended on torque multiplication with a torque converter like the Buick Dynaflow or Chevrolet PowerGlide which had no shifts while.operating in Drive or the GM Hydramatic which had a fluid coupling and shifted through four forward speeds in Drive. Now, the debate is whether we have multiple speeds in the transmission (my Sienna has 8 speeds) or whether we have the CVT transmissions.
That’s true. If you get a 2018, you also get autostop technology (with the V8 and both turbo V6’s, not sure about the base v6, which I wouldn’t be interested in anyway). All of these gas saving features remind me of problems I’ve tried to fix in the past on older vehicles (engine stalls at a complete stop, or engine misfires/hits on 4 out of 8 cyl when cruising). I’m just not fond of that type stuff. I get it, it saves fuel if you consider how many are on the road. But I’m afraid it’ll cost the individual consumer in repairs vs. fuel savings long term. I’m unwilling to be a martyr for the environment which will outlive us all anyway. Global warming, El Niño, hole in the ozone…I doubt it.
I suggest you don’t even go down that road
This website is known for having HEATED discussions, in regards to politics
And what you just mentioned can’t be discussed without getting into politics
Consider it a suggestion
But do what you please 
The theme song for the TV show “All In The Family” sung by Archie and Edith Bunker has a a line in the lyrics “Girls were girls and men were men”. Back in my day “Cars were cars and trucks were trucks”. Back then, trucks were for work. “Those were the days”.
“Gee our old LaSalle ran great. Those were the days.”
@shanonia. If I could have a LaSalle car and a Diamond T pickup to drive, I would be in heaven. I found a 1940 LaSalle at the Oldsmobile/Cadillac dealer back in 1957 priced at $75. I was 16 at the time and the dealer let me take it for a test drive. I drove it home and my dad said that I didn’t need a car, so I took it back to the dealer. Dad told me to save my money for college. After I graduated from college, I bought my first car to make the 350 mile trip to the university where I did graduate work. Ironically, that car, a 1947 Pontiac cost me $75.
10-4 thanks for the heads up. We should discuss religion next. 
1 Like
i bought a 66 289 mustang in 1976 for 475. i bought a 06 taurus 2 months ago for 475. not that they are comparable other than prices. 40 yrs of tech and same money. wow both cars were 10 yrs old at time. the mustang was no show car. dont recall what a super nice 66 went for in 76? it was not a fast back or shelby of course
The weakest link with a manual in this day and age is the driver.
3 Likes
Same dollar quantity but not same dollar value…
We have several current-model Ford and GM trucks in our fleet . . .
I have found that . . . for my particular bad back . . . the Ford bucket seats are very uncomfortable, no matter how it’s adjusted. No such problems with the GM bucket seats. I spoke with some of my colleagues, and they had the same experience(s)
A few days ago, I was working on a 1999 F-250 Superduty with bench seating. That seating configuration was FAR more comfortable than the current model Ford F-250 Superduty, in spite of the fact that the newer truck is probably superior in every other way.
I tend to agree with the others . . . some manufacturers are incompetent at equipping their vehicles with comfortable seating
I have noticed on the newer f150’s that the headrest is kind of obtrusive.
For me, the problem is the backrest, not the headrest