# Skidding logs with a Dodge Ram!



## STIHL-KID (Jan 26, 2007)

Just thought I'd throw a couple of pics showing the skidding operations my friend does with his Dodge Ram 1ton Dualie. 

Equipment used:

97' Dodge Ram Cummins

Steel cable with clevises

heavy duty towing hitch

Oh, and not to forget.......plenty of brute force and ignorance :hmm3grin2orange:


----------



## jazak (Jan 27, 2007)

So where's the truck....how do we know you're using it instead of a dozer??? lol

oh btw big tree....


----------



## STIHL-KID (Jan 27, 2007)

sorry the truck was left out of the picture on this excursion. However, my friend is no stranger to pulling big things with his pick-up. Here is a pick of his truck last summer.......

70ft long, 14 ft wide mobilehome being towed 3 miles......the first and last time he will do this


----------



## jazak (Jan 27, 2007)

STIHL-KID said:


> sorry the truck was left out of the picture on this excursion. However, my friend is no stranger to pulling big things with his pick-up. Here is a pick of his truck last summer.......
> 
> 70ft long, 14 ft wide mobilehome being towed 3 miles......the first and last time he will do this



I still can't tell if he is actually hooked up and pulling....you wouldn't happen to have a little movie for the unbelievers.lol :biggrinbounce2: :biggrinbounce2: just plaing with yah....


----------



## LarryTheCableGuy (Jan 27, 2007)

NOW I know who took my house!!


----------



## SRT-Tech (Jan 27, 2007)

i regularly skid 6' to 8' long by 12" - 20" wide logs with my Mazda B2200 2wd. BUT I dont use the truck alone, i rig multiple snatch blocks and one stationary anchor point away from the truck. The load the truck pulls is less than 200lbs. You can also pull out massive logs by hand using multiple snatch blocks , takes some time to rig mind you.


----------



## John Ellison (Jan 27, 2007)

Here is what he needs for pickup logging. Easier on the truck. Around 500 bf.


----------



## Haywire Haywood (Jan 27, 2007)

A buddy of mine pulled a construction trailer with a 1 ton tow truck and almost killed himself in the process. No trailer brakes and it pushed him wherever it wanted to. I think he discovered after the fact that he didn't have it hooked up right.

Ian


----------



## STIHL-KID (Jan 27, 2007)

jazak said:


> I still han't tell if je is actually hooked up and pulling....you wouldn't happen to have a little movie for the unbelievers.lol :biggrinbounce2: :biggrinbounce2: just plaing with yah....



Actually, I do have a video of his truck pulling the mobilehome (have it on disk). I need to get it transfered onto my computer.


----------



## deezulsmoke (Jan 27, 2007)

Nuthin like cummins power :hmm3grin2orange: :hmm3grin2orange: Now we just need some pics of a dodge dually pulling some fords and chevys LOL :hmm3grin2orange:


----------



## stumpjumper83 (Jan 27, 2007)

who needs a dodge when your ford can do this.... yes you can see the log, chain, and the truck in this photo.


----------



## TreeBarber (Jan 27, 2007)

In Webster’s dictionary, Power 
pow·er 
1.	the ability, skill, or capacity to do something
2.	physical force or strength
3.	Cummins Turbo Diesel


----------



## 046 (Jan 27, 2007)

not saying others can't pull  

Cummins Turbo Diesel rules!


----------



## Husky137 (Jan 27, 2007)

Stupidity with a half-life comes to mind.


----------



## chowdozer (Jan 28, 2007)

STIHL-KID said:


> sorry the truck was left out of the picture on this excursion. However, my friend is no stranger to pulling big things with his pick-up. Here is a pick of his truck last summer.......
> 
> 70ft long, 14 ft wide mobilehome being towed 3 miles......the first and last time he will do this



From a past life, many years ago while I was a forklift operator at a warehouse... I Have some information for your friend.  

One day, I decided to go out back and lift the tongue on a construction trailer (empty), same size as you got there. Looked just like it but it had some construction company's name on it. The tongue was sitting on a stack of pallets and the pallets were showing some fatigue in areas. My plan was to lift the tongue and slide some new pallets under it. The ol Toyota wouldn't do it. The hydraulics bypassed on me. Never had that happen before. At the time, I knew I could lift two 40"x48" pallets of pizza sauce in cases of six #10 tins, 40 cases to the pallet. That's +/-4000#. The rearend of the jitney would get a little light, but if you took it slow it would do ok. 

Trying to lift that trailer, all I can say is the tongue weight exceeded 4000#.

If your friend is hooking 4000# of hitch weight to his Dodge, that's great but he's going to break something. I pray not on a public road.

4000# is doable on a gooseneck, but on a receiver hitch it's too far behind the rear axle. Alot of leverage there!

Just because the truck can pull it doesn't mean the truck can tow it.

He can take that for what it's worth to him.


----------



## bytehoven (Jan 28, 2007)

stumpjumper83 said:


> who needs a dodge when your ford can do this.... yes you can see the log, chain, and the truck in this photo.



I think I like your use of a short heavy chain over the longer section of steel cable.

What size tires ya got there on that pickup? They look like OEM 265/70R17 of the semi AT variety. I'm only askin' because that's about as much trouble as I might get into with my Ram 2500, and I'm thinkin' I could survive with my stock BFG Rugged Trail tires. :hmm3grin2orange:


----------



## stumpjumper83 (Jan 28, 2007)

Yes the tires are stock on that Ford, I wanna get some mud and snows on it, but I'm waiting till I wear the stock ones out first. Second, let me be honest. The pic of my truck pullin that log is a hoax. Just a little something to get the dodge guys going. That log is a little better than 36' and green. Small end was about 16" - 18" or so. Using those figures the log weight is 6,350- 6,600 lbs. I skidded the log to where it was at with an Ih 966 which is about 100hp farm tractor weighing in somewhere close to 12,000 lbs. I just thought it would make a cool pic and when the thread showed up I thought why not.


----------



## hanniedog (Jan 28, 2007)

*stumpjumper83*

When I saw your picture bull chit was what came to mind first. I don't care what make truck you have moving that log would be hard to do. Not getting on you everyone needs their chain pulled once in a while. Like you if I need to move a big log go to the barn and get out the 1586. 175 horses and a half inch chain can move allott. As to the guy moving that log with his 1 ton truck I would only believe it if I saw it. I guess anything is possible but not very likely.


----------



## STIHL-KID (Jan 28, 2007)

hanniedog said:


> As to the guy moving that log with his 1 ton truck I would only believe it if I saw it. I guess anything is possible but not very likely.



Well, he did it........and in the snow at that. In one of the pictures, if you look closely in the background you can see that the log moved through the ditch a ways. When I watched this process happen it didn't take much throttle to get it out. As for the mobile-home, that was a one time deal only.......yes, he absolutely knows the strain that the truck was taking on the tongue. It just amazes me how the Cummins 5.9 exceeds anything in the light-duty truck market. IMO, the days of monster torque big block gas engines are over. A diesel will always produce more torque than it's gasoline counterpart. Powerstroke guys have their fun too......but i'm more into Cummins.


----------



## GLM (Jan 28, 2007)

If it was a  FORD I might believe you


----------



## deezulsmoke (Jan 28, 2007)

How many "Powerstroke" big rigs do you see running down the interstates ??


----------



## deezulsmoke (Jan 28, 2007)

You know whats funny is that Ford actually offers the same 5.9 cummins we have in our dodge trucks, but you have to get a F650 or larger before they start putting real diesel motors in there trucks.


----------



## 04ultra (Jan 28, 2007)

deezulsmoke said:


> How many "Powerstroke" big rigs do you see running down the interstates ??




I'm interested to know how many big rig's have 5.9 cummins in them ??

What is your definition of a big rig ?? class 8 maybe

.


----------



## STIHL-KID (Jan 28, 2007)

26,001 and up is considered heavy truck class.......anything lower is medium duty and then down to light-duty. Most highway tractors are only 6 cylinders. A few diesel V8's are around, but not as common. The backbone Cummins brand workhorse is the 855.


----------



## 04ultra (Jan 28, 2007)

STIHL-KID said:


> 26,001 and up is considered heavy truck class.......anything lower is medium duty and then down to light-duty. Most highway tractors are only 6 cylinders. A few diesel V8's are around, but not as common. The backbone Cummins brand workhorse is the 855.




The 855 is not a 5.9 liter.. 

Very true most Highway trucks are inline 6's in a whole different series of engine's



.


----------



## 04ultra (Jan 28, 2007)

deezulsmoke said:


> You know whats funny is that Ford actually offers the same 5.9 cummins we have in our dodge trucks, but you have to get a F650 or larger before they start putting real diesel motors in there trucks.




That statement was not real smart .. 

They sure did ... They used Power Stroke's, Cummin's and the Cat. 

Seems if you want the top power in the Ford 650and 750 you need the Cat.. 

2007 Ford F-750 Super Duty Chassis Cab: Specifications 

F-750 F-750 S 
Ratings Min. – Max. Min. – Max. 
Powertrain hp/torque (lb.-ft.) 

Cummins 185/420 – 275/660 
- 
Caterpillar 210/520 – *300/860 * 

Power Stroke 200/520 – 230/620 - 

GVWR (lbs.) 30,000 – 33,000 31,000 – 33,000

BTW Not bashing the 5.9 .. Just showing its not the best option in all cases


----------



## disandat (Jan 29, 2007)

04ultra said:


> I'm interested to know how many big rig's have 5.9 cummins in them ??
> 
> What is your definition of a big rig ?? class 8 maybe
> 
> .



Actually, around here, there are more Duramaxes on the road than Powerstrokes or Cummins IMO


----------



## stumpjumper83 (Jan 29, 2007)

The rest of the picture... This is a better view of what was holding my ford back. Bet your dodge can't pull it.


----------



## deezulsmoke (Jan 29, 2007)

Not Smart ?? I am simply stating the facts. Go To fords website, you already posted the numbers, ect. Cat is a very good diesel motor. Powerstrokes are light duty v-8s that started out as converted gas motors, same as chevy. Cummins 5.9 is not even in the same class as those v-8 motors. Ford and Chevy are considered light duty motors, Cummins 5.9 is a medium duty motor used in much larger trucks and equipment than a 1 ton truck. Do your homework before you open your mouth  




04ultra said:


> That statement was not real smart ..
> 
> They sure did ... They used Power Stroke's, Cummin's and the Cat.
> 
> ...


----------



## deezulsmoke (Jan 29, 2007)

Ultra, I think you should read the quote again before you say the statement was not very smart. I simply stated that ford offered the same engine in F650 and above, never said anything about cat or powerstroke. 







04ultra said:


> That statement was not real smart ..
> 
> They sure did ... They used Power Stroke's, Cummin's and the Cat.
> 
> ...


----------



## 04ultra (Jan 29, 2007)

deezulsmoke said:


> How many "Powerstroke" big rigs do you see running down the interstates ??






I still want to hear your definition of Big Rig ???? Is your Idea of Big Rig a Class 5-7 ?? Im just wondering???


----------



## STIHL-KID (Jan 29, 2007)

Powerstroke engines (commonly in Ford Light-Duty applications) are made by International. These engines to my knowledge are not used in what people consider "Big Rigs". Heavy Duty Trucks are classified into 2 classes: class 7 (26,001-33,000 GVW) and class 8 (33,001 GVW and over). I believe the Caterpillar engine that is available for the F-650/F-750 is the C7 engine.


----------



## 04ultra (Jan 29, 2007)

STIHL-KID said:


> Powerstroke engines (commonly in Ford Light-Duty applications) are made by International. These engines to my knowledge are not used in what people consider "Big Rigs". Heavy Duty Trucks are classified into 2 classes: class 7 (26,001-33,000 GVW) and class 8 (33,001 GVW and over). I believe the Caterpillar engine that is available for the F-650/F-750 is the C7 engine.




Yes it is the C-7 ... 

All Im asking is where is there a 5.9 cummins in a Big Rig ???? And what is considered a Big Rig?? Thats all Im asking ..


----------



## deezulsmoke (Jan 29, 2007)

I never said there was a 5.9 liter cummins in a tractor/trailer. I simply asked how many big rigs (tractor/trailer) do you see with a powerstroke engine in them ?? Cummins, Detroit, and Cat are the big three. I dont want to get into a pissing match here, but there is no comparison when you are talking the consumer market chevy and ford diesel engines compared with a medium duty motor such as the cummins. If ford had a cat or cummins in there one tons, I would be driving one instead of the dodge. The cummins engine is the only reason I am driving a dodge right now.

And it is a 6.7 liter, not 5.9. Dodge is putting the new cummins 6.7 liter in, replacing the 5.9 liter. 





04ultra said:


> Yes it is the C-7 ...
> 
> All Im asking is where is there a 5.9 cummins in a Big Rig ???? And what is considered a Big Rig?? Thats all Im asking ..


----------



## 04ultra (Jan 29, 2007)

deezulsmoke said:


> I never said there was a 5.9 liter cummins in a tractor/trailer. I simply asked how many big rigs (tractor/trailer) do you see with a powerstroke engine in them ?? Cummins, Detroit, and Cat are the big three. I dont want to get into a pissing match here, but there is no comparison when you are talking the consumer market chevy and ford diesel engines compared with a medium duty motor such as the cummins. If ford had a cat or cummins in there one tons, I would be driving one instead of the dodge. The cummins engine is the only reason I am driving a dodge right now.
> 
> And it is a 6.7 liter, not 5.9. Dodge is putting the new cummins 6.7 liter in, replacing the 5.9 liter.




You for got Mercedes Diesels...............


----------



## deezulsmoke (Jan 29, 2007)

Here is a pic of the rods just for comparison. Thought it might be interesting.


----------



## 04ultra (Jan 29, 2007)

Hmmmmmmmm must have been some changes between your picture and mine...LOL


----------



## STIHL-KID (Jan 29, 2007)

Deezulsmoke,

Nice comparison picture! The Duramax seems to have the smallest connecting rod of them all. The thing I don't care for when it comes to the Duramax is it's body style and my biggest reason for not liking it is.......IFS up front, yuk. I give props to Ford and Dodge for keeping the straight axle. I guess light duty Cummins engines will be placed into Ford trucks in the near future.


----------



## deezulsmoke (Jan 29, 2007)

Yes that is one thing I do not like about the chevy. I cannot believe they put that on the one-ton duallies, and got away from the straight axle.


----------



## deezulsmoke (Jan 29, 2007)

Okay, you got me on that one :hmm3grin2orange: :hmm3grin2orange: 






04ultra said:


> Hmmmmmmmm must have been some changes between your picture and mine...LOL


----------



## 04ultra (Jan 29, 2007)

deezulsmoke said:


> Okay, you got me on that one :hmm3grin2orange: :hmm3grin2orange:



That is right off the Cummins forum .. LOL


.


----------



## SmokinDodge (Jan 29, 2007)

opcorn:


----------



## Andyshine77 (Jan 30, 2007)

deezulsmoke said:


> Yes that is one thing I do not like about the chevy. I cannot believe they put that on the one-ton duallies, and got away from the straight axle.



So you like the choppy ride. I'm not a chevy guy myself but there independent front end is light years ahead of dodge or ford, it also costs more for Chevy to produce, it's just a much better setup. The only reason Ford and Dodge don't use an independent set up, is because of one thing money, it's much cheaper to use a solid axle. Same thing with the Ford mustang it's all about saving money. 

In all honesty I dislike the big three, they fill our heads with that's not strong enough, that won't last long, but ten years down the road there using it, whatever it is.


----------



## deezulsmoke (Jan 30, 2007)

The solid axle is much stronger that the independent front suspension. People expect to buy a 1-ton dually and have it ride like a cadillac and that is not going to happen. These trucks are meant to be worked not rode around in just to say I have a huge truck with a diesel motor in it, which is what a lot of people i see are doing. They dont even have anything to pull, and they are driving around in a 3/4 or a 1 ton pickup. I couldnt tell you how many CV joints I have seen torn up on the new chevy 1-ton trucks. My buddy just had a solid axle put in the front of his. The one thing I wish dodge would do is put a lockout on the front of these trucks instead of the automatic hub. I am not all that impressed with the dodge pickup, other than the motor. I would have to say the nicest truck I have driven so far as interior and ride would have to be the chevy. Chevys big mistake was putting aluminum heads on a diesel motor.


----------



## deezulsmoke (Jan 30, 2007)

I am just waiting to see what Toyota is going to do on the diesel truck market here in the US. Sad, but they will probably have something better than any of the big three.


----------



## Andyshine77 (Jan 30, 2007)

I had an old 84 Buick diesel at one time, what a POS. I found it funny that GM had to have Isuzu build them a diesel motor.

Aluminum heads have always been a hot topic. Most of the gossip came from the old Crosleys (spelling)? without the proper head gaskets, aluminum heads on an iron block would cause electrolysis, this turns the coolant to acid, the motors would rust from the inside out. Everything else, like head warping, expansion and so on, is nothing but old school BS. In fact engines with aluminum heads often do better. If alum heads fail on an engine it's do to bad designed not the fact that they are aluminum.

I do however think that the Cummins engine is the best of the three.

Later Andy.


----------



## 046 (Jan 30, 2007)

certainly not an expert, only recently purchased a 97 12valve cummins turbo diesel. 97 12v is considered the best year made. 

could be wrong remember seeing... cummins 5.9 is rated to pull 46k lbs and is not used in big rigs. 

5.9 cummins is used in Freightliner mid sized trucks. here's discussion about 5.9 cummins used in Ford. 

http://www.thedieselstop.com/archiv...83&page=21&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1.htm



04ultra said:


> Yes it is the C-7 ...
> 
> All Im asking is where is there a 5.9 cummins in a Big Rig ???? And what is considered a Big Rig?? Thats all Im asking ..


----------



## BIG JAKE (Jan 30, 2007)

*Toyota takeover? I doubt it.*



deezulsmoke said:


> I am just waiting to see what Toyota is going to do on the diesel truck market here in the US. Sad, but they will probably have something better than any of the big three.



Judging by the Tundra I'd say there is little to worry about. Have you seen that tiny rear end they put on em'? Work them at all and those axle bearings will be sloppy at 50k miles. 
Personally, I wouldn't have a Ford 6.0 diesel(maybe the 6.4 will be better), and Dodge can't build a good automatic tranny-they should concentrate on that instead of screwing with a new engine. 
No, I like my GMC Duramax with it's smooth ride and the so far bullet proof Allison tranny (118k miles). That doesn't mean much unless you tow and haul. I do alot of that. 
My 2 cents


----------



## Peacock (Jan 30, 2007)

deezulsmoke said:


> Powerstrokes are light duty v-8s that started out as converted gas motors, same as chevy.




Neither the 7.3L, 6.0L, 6.4L or 6.6L are based on gas engines. These are all diesel engines through and through. I spent 4 years as a Ford dealer tech.

Who cares what engine has the biggest con rods? If they don't break it doesn't matter. 

I am a tech at a Dodge dealer now and we see quite a few problems with pumps on the 24v engines. We also see a few blocks with porous castings causing coolant to leak out the block.


----------



## Peacock (Jan 30, 2007)

BIG JAKE said:


> Judging by the Tundra I'd say there is little to worry about. Have you seen that tiny rear end they put on em'? Work them at all and those axle bearings will be sloppy at 50k miles.
> Personally, I wouldn't have a Ford 6.0 diesel(maybe the 6.4 will be better), and Dodge can't build a good automatic tranny-they should concentrate on that instead of screwing with a new engine.
> No, I like my GMC Duramax with it's smooth ride and the so far bullet proof Allison tranny (118k miles). That doesn't mean much unless you tow and haul. I do alot of that.
> My 2 cents



The new Tundra has a much larger axle under it.

Believe it or not, but the last 6.0's have been better than the 7.3 ever was. Waaayyyy more power too.


----------



## Cummins_ISB_5.9 (Jan 30, 2007)

I have a 01 CTD 24 Valve 6 Speed, and I love it, Loads of power and torque.


----------



## woodfarmer (Jan 30, 2007)

*real horsepower*

since this thread is now way off topic i thought i'd show you guys some real horsepower. i'm not sure about the tow truck but the mack attatched to the house is 500hp. btw thats 4500 sq' brick attatched, and a 4 car garage we figured 80 ton


----------



## 046 (Jan 30, 2007)

dead-on comments for 24valve cummins, 98.5 to 2002. they had VP44 bosch fuel inj pump that depended upon lift pump to cool. it's common for lift pump to fail, taking out main VP44. costing $2k+ to fix. to add insult to injury in 1998 they started using #53 blocks that failed on side of block leaking coolant. 

that's why 12valve cummins is considered to be best, with 97 being the last year of 12valve with all bugs worked out. it's easy to bomb a cummins to 300+hp and not lose mileage or reliability. 

24valve CTD folks use fuel pressure gauges to keep track of lift pumps, extending life. it's not unusual for CTD folks to rack up 400k+ miles. this includes the 24valve folks. 

loads of CTD's running around with 500HP to rear wheels. some are pulling 700+ HP running 1/4 miles times of 12 seconds. 



Peacock said:


> Neither the 7.3L, 6.0L, 6.4L or 6.6L are based on gas engines. These are all diesel engines through and through. I spent 4 years as a Ford dealer tech.
> 
> Who cares what engine has the biggest con rods? If they don't break it doesn't matter.
> 
> I am a tech at a Dodge dealer now and we see quite a few problems with pumps on the 24v engines. We also see a few blocks with porous castings causing coolant to leak out the block.


----------



## GLM (Jan 30, 2007)

BIG JAKE said:


> Judging by the Tundra I'd say there is little to worry about. Have you seen that tiny rear end they put on em'? Work them at all and those axle bearings will be sloppy at 50k miles.
> Personally, I wouldn't have a Ford 6.0 diesel(maybe the 6.4 will be better), and Dodge can't build a good automatic tranny-they should concentrate on that instead of screwing with a new engine.
> No, I like my GMC Duramax with it's smooth ride and the so far bullet proof Allison tranny (118k miles). That doesn't mean much unless you tow and haul. I do alot of that.
> My 2 cents



The Tundra rear end is the same a a Tacoma rear end, straight from a Toyota master tech over at the diesel stop, I thought he was kidding until I went down to the dealership in looked , that's why the Tundra has never had a large towing capacity. I'm not sure if the new tundra with the 5.7 is the same but the trucks I looked at last year where nice riding trucks that I would not want to work at all. I Think they just upped the towing capacity to 10,000lbs?? thats nothing in the truck world. I love my 96 F350 solid front axle, it will take it and then some, If I want smooth quite ride I will drive my Toyota Camry.  Otherwise I like my old 96', I like my 7.3 because of the most important feature Its PAID FOR!!!!!  If you want to stuff a Cummins under the hood I would not stop you either mothing wring with that engine at all :biggrinbounce2: all the new diesel emmision regs comming out is going to reak havoc on the cost and reliability of all the brands of truck I'm glad I dont have to worry about buying a new one!


----------



## disandat (Jan 31, 2007)

No matter the maker, diesel power is definitely the way to go. You can get more bolt on power per dollar with a diesel engine than a gas engine any day. Duramax was built from the ground up. GM diesel engines used to be guttless but the Duramax mated with the Allison tranny is a totally awesome combonation. And, by the way, take a look at all the new 2007 shifters in these trucks and guess what they are all going to...quite a bit of similarity with the gm shifters.

Doesn't matter. I've been a Chevy guy ever since my Dad bought his '68 Impala with the 327. I love their trucks...not too crazy about the Aluminum thing...but I still like their trucks. Dodge would be 2nd and Ford at the end. Kind of funny that Chevy Duramax has the lowest stock horsepower rating of the 3, but I still like them the best.


----------



## Peacock (Jan 31, 2007)

disandat said:


> Kind of funny that Chevy Duramax has the lowest stock horsepower rating of the 3, but I still like them the best.



Actually, for '06+ it's the highest.


----------



## 046 (Feb 1, 2007)

here's my 97 CTD loaded with 3k+lbs


----------



## disandat (Feb 1, 2007)

Is that loaded down with hardwood?? I've had 3500lbs in my '68 Chevy 3/4 ton a few times. Not that I really like doing that, but I've done it.


----------



## 046 (Feb 1, 2007)

yup, loaded down with green hardwoods cut to 24in. that's about the heaviest I've had in my CTD bed. 

Cummins hauled this load with little effort.


----------



## disandat (Feb 1, 2007)

That's a lot of weight. And it takes a lot of torque to get the load moving.


----------



## SmokinDodge (Feb 1, 2007)

disandat said:


> That's a lot of weight. And it takes a lot of torque to get the load moving.




Not really. Any half ton truck should be able to TOW at least that.


----------



## deezulsmoke (Feb 2, 2007)

I had 5k in concrete blocks on the bed of my dually, and other than squatting the rear end, you would never hardly know it was there. You all just need to give in and admit that:


CUMMINS

Is The Best !!!! :hmm3grin2orange: :hmm3grin2orange: :hmm3grin2orange:


----------



## deezulsmoke (Feb 2, 2007)

And No, I know there is no 5.9 in a big rig, they are more like 14 liter in-line six cylinder engines. I was simply making a statement to look at who makes those engines. You dont see Powerstroke diesel motors in medium or heavy-duty trucks, but you do see cummins, detroit, and cat. Even ford offers the 5.9 liter cummins in there F650 and up, that should tell you something about the 5.9. Although now they are using the new 6.7 liter cummins with all the emission junk on it.


----------



## STIHL-KID (Feb 3, 2007)

*Ok guys.........here's the proof!*

Last night my friend found his dyno sheet with the HP and TQ specs. So again......1997 Dodge Ram Cummins 1ton Duallie used for skidding logs (it can be done and was shown at the begining of this thread). The paper work doesn't tell a lie. Enjoy! opcorn: 

Stock Factory specs: 180hp/420ft lbs tq

My friend's output: 356hp/844ft lbs tq


----------



## 046 (Feb 3, 2007)

I could easily bomb my 97 Cummins tubo diesel to 300+HP, but will not not. until I put in a new three disc torque converter and rebuild tranny. 



STIHL-KID said:


> Last night my friend found his dyno sheet with the HP and TQ specs. So again......1997 Dodge Ram Cummins 1ton Duallie used for skidding logs (it can be done and was shown at the begining of this thread). The paper work doesn't tell a lie. Enjoy! opcorn:
> 
> Stock Factory specs: 180hp/420ft lbs tq
> 
> My friend's output: 356hp/844ft lbs tq


----------



## rb_in_va (Feb 3, 2007)

STIHL-KID said:


> Last night my friend found his dyno sheet with the HP and TQ specs. So again......1997 Dodge Ram Cummins 1ton Duallie used for skidding logs (it can be done and was shown at the begining of this thread). The paper work doesn't tell a lie. Enjoy! opcorn:
> 
> Stock Factory specs: 180hp/420ft lbs tq
> 
> My friend's output: 356hp/844ft lbs tq



That doesn't prove that he skidded the log with his truck.


----------



## sawinredneck (Feb 3, 2007)

STIHL-KID said:


> Last night my friend found his dyno sheet with the HP and TQ specs. So again......1997 Dodge Ram Cummins 1ton Duallie used for skidding logs (it can be done and was shown at the begining of this thread). The paper work doesn't tell a lie. Enjoy! opcorn:
> 
> Stock Factory specs: 180hp/420ft lbs tq
> 
> My friend's output: 356hp/844ft lbs tq





rb_in_va said:


> That doesn't prove that he skidded the log with his truck.



That doesn't prove he could get traction to skid logs with his truck!!!


----------



## jbone (Feb 4, 2007)

deezulsmoke said:


> Not Smart ?? I am simply stating the facts. Go To fords website, you already posted the numbers, ect. Cat is a very good diesel motor. Powerstrokes are light duty v-8s that started out as converted gas motors, same as chevy. Cummins 5.9 is not even in the same class as those v-8 motors. Ford and Chevy are considered light duty motors, Cummins 5.9 is a medium duty motor used in much larger trucks and equipment than a 1 ton truck. Do your homework before you open your mouth



I thought that GM uses their D-max in ALL of their trucks?


----------



## deezulsmoke (Feb 4, 2007)

Everybody should have watched the episode on "Trucks". He hooked up to a big rig with a d9 dozer on it (I am pretty sure it was a d9) and pulled the entire load down the road with a 1-ton duallie. It was pretty impressive. That show use to be awesome until the new guys took over the show. I wouldn't have thought that truck would have pulled that load, but it sure did, semi and all. I believe that was with a chevy dually, so you can imagine what the dodge and cummins combo could do !!! :hmm3grin2orange: :hmm3grin2orange: Stihl-kid, mine dynoed at 427 hp, and around 850 on torque, that is with a box, intake, and exhaust. I have friends that build 12 valve pulling trucks who are running around 120-150 lbs of boost. It is truly awesome seeing those trucks run. I am going to get a 12 valve one of these days when I find one with the right price. I really miss my old one.


----------



## deezulsmoke (Feb 4, 2007)

sawinredneck said:


> That doesn't prove he could get traction to skid logs with his truck!!!



I know my duallie even with 4x4 is absolutely horrible in the snow unless I have about 2000 lbs in the bed lol. Then it will go where ever I want it to. I wouldn't doubt the truck pulled that log, but I would say he would have to have some weight in the bed just for traction in the snow. Two years ago when we had a bad snow storm, I spent the night in my truck lol. After digging it out three different times I finally gave up and set the idle up on the truck and went to sleep. We filled the bed with snow and weight the next morning and I was okay. My truck bucks so bad in the snow, you just cant hardly go in it. I would really like to find a set of traction bars for it, if anyone built any for the stock trucks, they would help a lot with these trucks.


----------



## GLM (Feb 4, 2007)

I'm waiting for the video on you-tube opcorn: truck threads are alwaysthe best


----------



## John Ellison (Feb 4, 2007)

STIHL-KID said:


> Just thought I'd throw a couple of pics showing the skidding operations my friend does with his Dodge Ram 1ton Dualie.
> 
> Equipment used:
> 
> ...



No doubt those diesel trucks can pull a lot. But I would tell your friend that he would be better of using chain unless he has a winch. It is a foul holt in the picture and will kink/break the cable and be hard to unhook. The thing with cable is there is no way to easily shorten up unless you have a drum/winch and when pulling the closer to the load the easier it comes.
So ground skidding with a truck it is best to temporarily mount a grab hook to your pulling point and use a chain on the log. Then you can shorten up.
The highest hitch point you can get will also make a big difference. A truck with a flat bed and a grab hook mounted on the bed will actually lift the front end of a log when it is hooked up short. If the hitch point is above the log instead of down at the same level like a trailer hitch you can pull a lot more. It is the porch swing effect.


----------

