Which Truck Manufacturer is Most Serious About Rust Prevention

I'm doing a little research for the father.
His 1997 Chevy K2500 is going to have to be gone soon, purely because of rust—in particular the brake lines (just began leaking), fuel lines (leak), and fuel tank (leaks)

First I should say comparing the way Chevy prepared their late model trucks for rust to our VW's rust proofing is an eye-opener—no comparison. Whatever VW coats their metal brake lines in is far superior to Chevy...my car has twice the miles as the K2500 in the same climate and the rear beam brake lines are rust free! What's wrong with plastic fuel tanks and "rubber" fuel lines in a truck, as VW used on our vehicles?

Based on my research, most trucks from the late 1990s - early 2000s quickly become rust buckets in the salt belt though...including the much publicized Toyotas.

So: What is a solid truck (mid-sized or full sized), with the smartest rust prevention measures, produced within the last five years? To start with a clean slate so to speak, he's also looking to buy well south of N.H.

Tired of having rust steal mechanically sound vehicles from us...A '98 Mercedes C230 of ours will succumb to rust soon, as did some past vehicles, including a Honda Civic and Plymouth Grand Caravan. In contrast, the Volvo S70 and VW Jetta TDI have fared much better due to superior rust prevention measures by the manufacturers.

If you want something that will not turn to ferrous oxide buy something non-ferrous.
The best selling car ever is nearly 100% corrosion proof due to almost no steel used at all. The lil' tykes "CozyCoupe" has steel for the axle and door hinge and that's about it.

DeLorean, Range Rover, Audi A8, Honda Insight (1st gen), Corvette, Trabant, my SAAB Sonett all disguise the ravages of rust thanks to their outer skin of non steel, but they all use steel and iron based components elsewhere that can mask the entropy.

Im afraid you won't find a truck tgat won't rust... Few guys at the shop have early to mid 2000s F series and the whole body is rotted out and about to come off the frame by the radiator support. Dodges don't fare any better. Brake lines in Fords are just as bad as Chevys as I work on quite a few plow trucks in the winter: many brake lines/ fuel lines.

If you want something that will not turn to ferrous oxide buy something non-ferrous.

Click to expand...

That's just it: The two vehicles we have had good luck with, the Volvo and Volkswagen, employed non-ferrous material in smart places (as mentioned with the plastic fuel tank and non-ferrous fuel lines). The Volvo also used plastic rocker panels, The VW's body panels are filled with a waxy substance and the under body is covered in a tough layer of something that resists rust exceptionally well.

Im afraid you won't find a truck that won't rust... Few guys at the shop have early to mid 2000s F series and the whole body is rotted out and about to come off the frame by the radiator support. Dodges don't fare any better. Brake lines in Fords are just as bad as Chevys as I work on quite a few plow trucks in the winter: many brake lines/ fuel lines.

Click to expand...

Yup I've noticed myself that the Ford and Dodges are no better than the Chevys. I can't accept just 2-6 yrs of road salt exposure before major rust-related repairs....ridiculous!!
So is the problem that body-on-frame vehicles are more difficult to adequately address rust; if not, then why can car manufacturers do it?

Has anyone been under the newest generation of Dodge, Chevy, Ford, Toyota (in particular), and Nissan trucks and seen any design changes or added preventative measures? I'm often told that rust prevention has advanced tremendously but yet I wonder if trucks have been left behind.

Examples of Chevy's stupidity as far as corrosion goes: A co-workers' 2005 Trailblazer with 60k was going bonkers electrically. Thinking a possible bad ground, I look and see that interior electronics are grounded on the lower edge of the frame rail below the driver's door, just behind the front wheels...about 8'' off the ground. I was pretty sure I knew what the problem was then, and indeed, those grounds were all corroded.

In another example, the early 2000s chevy trucks are notorious for losing their brakes (NHTSA probe opened last year, check out: http://www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/gm_silverado_brakes.html). Here is how one owner describes the brake line routing: "The brake lines were routed from the factory going from the master cylinder to the abs valve on the outside of the frame rail and then over the top of the rail to the abs valve that is mounted on the inside of the rail. Why not route them straight down from the master cylinder to the abs valve on the inside of the rail so that water and snow from the left front tire doesn't hit the lines and rust them? And why not use stainless steel material for such important parts?"

So I contend that it is negligence on the case of these truck manufacturers. I think they can do better and I want to know if anyone is making design changes or increasing their corrosion protection (increased confidence might show up in beefed up corrosion warranties?). Maybe we need some European-designed trucks.

I recall late 80's Chevy's doing quite well. Maybe early 90's too, but I wasn't looking too closely then. These days it's staggering to see many late model pickups sporting rusty rockers or around the wheel arches. I think my Jetta has more rust on the body that it does underneath.

supton said:

I recall late 80's Chevy's doing quite well. Maybe early 90's too,

Click to expand...

Funny you say that, I've had numerous Chevy guys tell me the older trucks were better for rust. I'm wondering if DOT uses a more lethal mix these days or just more of it, or whether GM quality fell.

"GM quality fell"... My vote is for that! Actually, digging deep into the brain, I think they had an experiment a few years prior, with recycled sheetmetal. Unfortunately, paint didn't stick real well, and would come off in sheets. So I guess they decided to galvanize everything, so as to prevent a repeat performance.

Although, to be fair, I think today we drive more; and I do think they treat the roads more. I'm not sure what the big gain of that liquid stuff that they have been putting down lately is, but I'm guessing it's no nicer to cars.

Magnesium chloride mixed with humidity/moisture will eat any steel regardless of the coatings/galvanized/paint. Yes its much worse than the road salt used in the past and its a liquid so it gets on everything. Mix that with bits of sand that chew away at paints protective coatings.

Wash your cars frequently and use good paint sealants before winter is the only prevention. Just like you follow PM for your mechanical bits your exterior needs the same attention if you want it to last.

I have lots of older vehicles that where known for rust and not one of them have a spot of rust. I've seen people pack mud into their fenders after a snow storm and drive around for weeks than wonder why their truck is rusted already One of my original trucks a 85 F150 had zero rust when i sold it to a friend on a small farm. 2 years later you could see rust coming through the rear fenders and 4 years later you couldn't determine the paint color. It was never washed and usually covered in mud from farm work.

Good luck. When I was looking for a light pick-up a few years ago ruts was the number one problem. I was looking for mid-size instead of full size and basically ended up with only one option in my sub $5k budget.

S10/Dakota - just hated both trucks as far as style and driving so they were off the list
Tacoma - what I wanted, but sky high prices
Frontier - rustiest trucks that I looked at

So I ended up with a Ford Ranger (okay a Mazda B3000). It had a solid body with only a little rust at the bottom of the doors. The frame wasn't bad and I paid a couple hundred bucks to have it undercoated with POR15 which has held up well through 2 more winters.

What I really really wanted was a Toyota T100 which I think are the perfect mid-sized truck. But they stopped making them in 1998 and the ones I saw were either beat and rusted out or crazy expensive (think TDI wagons in the PNW).

EDIT: BTW I agree that Volvos are the best car that I've ever owned with regard to rust resistance.

Frontier - rustiest trucks that I looked at

I agree. The wife bought a new 2010 Frontier SE 4X4. Within 4 months the whole under carriage was covered in surface rust. She was so pi$$ed she got rid of it on her 2011 Golf TDI. I've used POR 15 on my rigs for a few years now and I offered to undercoat it with that. She just wanted it gone. POR 15 is great stuff, just a little messy to apply. Don't get it on bare skin.

KITEWAGON said:

. The frame wasn't bad and I paid a couple hundred bucks to have it undercoated with POR15 which has held up well through 2 more winters.

Click to expand...

She just wanted it gone. POR 15 is great stuff, just a little messy to apply. Don't get it on bare skin.

Click to expand...

Ah I was wondering about POR15. I've used it with great success. Did you have no problem finding a body shop that would do this? If not, what was the name of the shop you used?

And thanks for the Frontier caution, it was actually on the short list. However I read up on the auto trans cooler leak which kills the transmission when the coolant leaks into it. Apparently it affects a large number 2005-?? Nissan trucks and SUVs. Wasn't able to get solid information when Nissan silently fixed the problem.

Other than the need to undercoat with POR15, any thing else stand out about the Frontier Cogen Man? MPG? I love that they offer a 6MT with a V6, but they're impossible to find second hand and I've heard the clutch and transmission have little tolerance for bad drivers. I've heard the turning radius is pathetic for a mid-sized truck. But I really think they're the best looking mid-sized truck, they look rugged at least.

I am shocked at Tacoma resale, I know they're good, but I don't think they're that good. $15,000 might get you an 2006 4-cylinder with 75,000 on it!

For whatever reason, he seems ready to stick with Chevy and seems to be leaning towards a 5.3l 4x4 stripper, 2008 or newer (the new Silverados seem to be getting uniformly positive reviews, and they're new enough to be part of the GM resurgence that seems to have featured higher quality vehicles). You can get a 2008 with 30-50k for 15,000, and a new one for under 20 if there is truth in dealer advertising.

What about the 4.8? I'd think the 4.8 would be more common in the stripper models; and probably a bit cheaper too. Does the extra half-liter make that big of a difference?

eb2143 said:

I can't accept just 2-6 yrs of road salt exposure before major rust-related repairs....ridiculous!!

Click to expand...

Then move out of New Hampshire.

I have a 2000 model Ford Excursion that originally sold in Canada. It's incredibly well-prepared for harsh salt environment, completely undercoated. I've been blown away by the number of bolts that weren't rusted solid when servicing brake calipers, wheel bearings, etc.
If you're in NH, you may be able to find a Canadian truck with better preparation for those elements?

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

MrMopar said:

Then move out of New Hampshire.

Click to expand...

As stated, we've had vehicles that have withstood salt wonderfully. It's just a matter of finding a similar truck, or preparing a truck with POR15 upon purchase. But thanks for the advice!

What about the 4.8? I'd think the 4.8 would be more common in the stripper models; and probably a bit cheaper too. Does the extra half-liter make that big of a difference?

Click to expand...

You're right, looking at the base models they have a 4.8 with a 4 speed automatic. Everything I've read says the 5.3 with the 6 speed auto is loads better, mostly because of the transmission. The truck will do some towing.

I have a 2000 model Ford Excursion that originally sold in Canada. It's incredibly well-prepared for harsh salt environment, completely undercoated. I've been blown away by the number of bolts that weren't rusted solid when servicing brake calipers, wheel bearings, etc.
If you're in NH, you may be able to find a Canadian truck with better preparation for those elements?

Click to expand...

So is it well known that Ford undercoats their Canadian vehicles to a higher level, or is it a possibility that the original Canadian owner took extra steps (or are YOU the original Canadian owner?)?

Recently I've been trying to persuade him to buy a southern 7.3 stroker or 24 valve Cummins and then undercoat it when it arrives here. I found a number of southern 1996-2000 7.3's in the 100-150k range with ZF SF 47 5 speeds for less than 10,000. I think a big bus motor with a 5 speed manual transmission would be a whole lot of fun.

FWIW my 2001 7.3L has a plastic fuel tank. I've read of northerners having some issues with rear brake lines rusting out but replacement is not a huge deal. Also there was a major body style change at MY 99 to superduty. I think the superduty manuals are six speeds.

eb2143 said:

But thanks for the advice!

Click to expand...

Seriously though, that was a facetious comment. I hope it didn't come across wrong.

Isn't part of living in the Northeast that you just have to deal with vehicles that fall apart from road salt cancer? Higher cost of living and all that?

We're a bit sadistic like that. First we charge more to live here, then we apply taxes--and just when you think it's safe, we go and rub salt into your car. Just because we can.

But yeah, it's just part of living up here. If I lived in the South, I'd have to deal with running A/C during winter months, insects year round, and other stuff. [Insert redneck jokes here.] Definately a trade off involved.

Given how well VW's do with rust, it's a shame they don't bring over something more truck-like. It'd never compete, but it might be nice to pick one up used. You know, once the depreciation sets in, that is.

supton said:

But yeah, it's just part of living up here. If I lived in the South, I'd have to deal with running A/C during winter months, insects year round, and other stuff. [Insert redneck jokes here.] Definately a trade off involved.

Click to expand...

Come to the Midwest to experience it all. In Central Illinois we have a tax-and-spend legislature run by the Chicago Machine, brutally hot and humid summers where the AC can't keep up, bitter cold winters where the wind cuts across the flat plains and steals the breath right out of your lungs, and still have rednecks.

Other than the need to undercoat with POR15, any thing else stand out about the Frontier Cogen Man? MPG? I love that they offer a 6MT with a V6, but they're impossible to find second hand and I've heard the clutch and transmission have little tolerance for bad drivers. I've heard the turning radius is pathetic for a mid-sized truck. But I really think they're the best looking mid-sized truck, they look rugged at least.


MPG wasn't that great, but it's a 4X4. Lot more weight to haul around. I think she was getting about 14 mpg mostly city driving. She had the auto tranny so I can't speak to the 6 MT. Correct on the turning radius. And yes, a good looking rig but not sure how rugged as she didn't have it long and only used it on road. If you want rugged for off road look at a Toyota FJCruiser. Had one for 5 years. Very capable right out of the box. But mine got heavily modded for off road and that thing would go everywhere.

eb2143 said:

Based on my research, most trucks from the late 1990s - early 2000s quickly become rust buckets in the salt belt though...including the much publicized Toyotas.

So: What is a solid truck (mid-sized or full sized), with the smartest rust prevention measures, produced within the last five years? To start with a clean slate so to speak, he's also looking to buy well south of N.H.

Click to expand...

Toyota really upped their corrosion game from the 2004 model year on, imo. I have a 2003 Tundra and a 2004 Sequoia and the '04 Sequoia appears to have components and fasteners that are much more corrosion-resistant.

If I were you I'd look for an '05 or '06 Tundra - the last model years of the first generation Tundra - or an '01 to '03 Tundra that has had its frame replaced.

That's right, Toyota is stepping up and replacing the frames on ten year old out-of-warranty vehicles at no cost to the owner - $8,000 to $10,000 of work. If the rest if the truck is in good shape, that'll extend the life of the vehicle to 20 years or more.

Hell will freeze over before Union Motors or Government Motors will support their customers in that way.

migbro said:

Toyota really upped their corrosion game from the 2004 model year on, imo. I have a 2003 Tundra and a 2004 Sequoia and the '04 Sequoia appears to have components and fasteners that are much more corrosion-resistant.

If I were you I'd look for an '05 or '06 Tundra - the last model years of the first generation Tundra - or an '01 to '03 Tundra that has had its frame replaced.

That's right, Toyota is stepping up and replacing the frames on ten year old out-of-warranty vehicles at no cost to the owner - $8,000 to $10,000 of work. If the rest if the truck is in good shape, that'll extend the life of the vehicle to 20 years or more.

Click to expand...

Yep, my friend is having their '00 or '01 Tundra swapped onto a new frame right now. Crazy stuff.

If I was buying full size I think I'd have to go with a Tundra. But I do like the full size Chevy also.

My old Volvo mechanic, Royalty Automotive in Barrington, NH are the ones who applied the POR 15 for me. I think they did a nice job with it. One of the techs there actually suggested it for me when I first bought the truck and brought it in for inspection. I was already considering it so I went for it. I think I spent about $300 on it.

KITEWAGON said:

Yep, my friend is having their '00 or '01 Tundra swapped onto a new frame right now. Crazy stuff.

If I was buying full size I think I'd have to go with a Tundra. But I do like the full size Chevy also.

Click to expand...

I think the 2nd Gen Tundra - 2007 MY on - is too big. I really like my '03 Tundra. It's sort of a 7/8 scale 1/2-ton pickup.

I owned a '98 Dodge Ram 1500 pickup before the Tundra. That truck was a constant parts eater - mainly front end parts - but I also installed a full set of stainless steel brake lines a few months before my son wrecked it. To be fair, it still had the original engine and tranny at 130,000 miles.

KITEWAGON said:

My old Volvo mechanic, Royalty Automotive in Barrington, NH are the ones who applied the POR 15 for me. I think they did a nice job with it. One of the techs there actually suggested it for me when I first bought the truck and brought it in for inspection. I was already considering it so I went for it. I think I spent about $300 on it.

Click to expand...

Well, how about this. Toyota has just launched a new campaign for 2000 to 2003 Tundras that do not require a frame replacement. This campaign involves removing the truck bed, cleaning the frame and applying a corrosion resistant coating to both the outside AND INSIDE of the frame. About a thousand dollars worth of work, again at no cost to the owner.

migbro said:

I think the 2nd Gen Tundra - 2007 MY on - is too big. I really like my '03 Tundra. It's sort of a 7/8 scale 1/2-ton pickup.

Click to expand...

I agree with you. They keep making them bigger and bigger! Too big for my needs anyway. As I said earlier the ol' T100 was the perfect size pick-up for my needs (not that I have ever owned one ). And it looks good too.

Just an additional tip - find a local car wash that has underbody spray and use it monthly. Keeping debris off the steel parts is key to rust prevention.

IMHO, the difference in mfgr coatings on the steel is not as great a contributor to this as the individual vehicles environment. Everything from how the car is cleaned, to they type of tires (how much debris they throw) and road conditions contributes to it.

KITEWAGON said:

Royalty Automotive in Barrington, NH are the ones

Click to expand...

Ah yes, I've passed by and wondered about their work.

Thanks for the tips so far everyone.

The K2500 got its brake line fixed for $90 (if the repair had been over $200, that would have been it for it), so it is motoring onwards for now. It's amusing: the tank has steadily been holding less and less fuel as the rot descends...by extrapolating it out, I don't think the tank has much more than 12 months left before it won't hold more than 1/8th a tank!