# Diesels or gas in a 3/4 ton



## Fuzly (Dec 23, 2007)

Just reading the diesel/gasser thread and it got me thinking. I've been seriously considering a 3/4 ton pickup to haul all my gear, pull the ATV trailer, plow snow, get a bigger trailer, etc.

I've had a couple people tell me to stay away from the diesel unless "you really need it," which I take to mean pulling a big gooseneck or travel trailer.

One consideration is cold weather use. Some say it's a non-issue with the newer trucks. Others have told me they just don't run well in very cold temps, even if kept in a garage. What do you guys think?

Maintenance costs/fuel costs/initial purchase price are other considerations, as well.

Can a gas V8 powered truck do a good job pulling a big trailer, say a gooseneck with a piece of equipment on it?

I know a lot of you work your trucks hard, so your advice is appreciated.


----------



## reachtreeservi (Dec 23, 2007)

I've got a F-250 with the 7.3 in it and I love it. They take some getting used to, but once you do , you'll never go back to a gas burner. Diesel Is the only way to go if you are hauling any kind of trailer very much. IMO a gas burner will never pull a goose neck with a piece of equipment sufficiently . I've burnt out a few trying. Now a diesel is more expensive to run and repair. And the cost is more up front. But worth every penny.


----------



## Nuzzy (Dec 23, 2007)

Diesel.

Gas isn't even in the same ballpark. Seriously, get a diesel and you'll NEVER look back


----------



## Nuzzy (Dec 23, 2007)

Furthermore...

Try to get an extra 150 hp and 350 torq at the real wheels out of a gas motor for $600 bucks with a simple plug and play programmer...




:jawdrop:


----------



## eric_271 (Dec 23, 2007)

Dodge v10 could pull some kind of load at a cost of 3 to 5 mpg. Get a diesel if you want an engine that does not know weather its pulling a heavy load or no load. MPG stays about the same with heavy load or no load avg 18mpg with my cummins.


----------



## Frank Boyer (Dec 23, 2007)

The 2008 diesels are having problems with the particulate filters and regeneration. I drive a 2001 7.3 4 X 4 and like it.


----------



## TDunk (Dec 23, 2007)

If your going to be pulling/hualing something once or twice a month, then i'd prolly stick with a gasser. If your pulling once of twice a week, get a diesel. The new trucks don't have much of a problem starting in the cold, unless it's like -5 out. The biggest problem i've seen with cold weather starts is driver error. You always want to let your glow plugs cycle through, even if the engine is warm. If you drive 10 min. to work everyday, stay away from a diesel, they hate short trips. If you maintain a diesel, you can easily get 250,000 miles out of it. A gas jobby would be almost junk be then, if it made it that far.


----------



## 74fencer (Dec 23, 2007)

I have a 7.3 powerstroke diesel & pull with it almost everyday. I usually get 14 mpg and that is with a dually 4x4. I would consider a gasser if i rarely pulled a trailer.


----------



## DarylB (Dec 23, 2007)

Nuzzy said:


> Diesel.
> 
> Gas isn't even in the same ballpark. Seriously, get a diesel and you'll NEVER look back



This my friend is the truth. I've been pro-diesel for 6 years now, and will never own another gas-engined truck! 

Diesels work fine in the cold, given time to Warm up, and you run a Winter Cover when it's COLD outside. They also have block heaters which work well to get you warmed up quicker on those really cold days, but as mentioned above - short trips in cold weather aren't good for a diesel, the engine needs to hit 
operating temp and run for a bit to ensure the fuel is being burned completely.

Fuzly, you should also check out www.kennedydiesel.com and read up on John Kennedy's trucks. He sells performance stuff for all diesels. He's located in Royal Wisconsin. If you're close, go by there and see if John will let you ride in one of his rigs for a "Test Drive"


----------



## Frank Boyer (Dec 23, 2007)

*New oil and low sulfur fuel*

The 2008 diesel's need low sulfur (15 ppm) fuel and SM/CJ (Low Emission) motor oil. The new oil has the anti wear additives removed form the oil to extend cat life. You must run the new oil and low sulfur fuel in the 2008 diesels. 

The SM/CJ low Emission oil is a problem for all older engines because of potential cam and lifter wear. That means everything from lawn mowers, and chippers to any pre roller lifter car/truck engine. I added and article on the new oil.

“BACKWARD COMPATIBILITY” IN NEW ENGINE OILS ?
Published and Distributed by:
DF Sales & Marketing

Editorial
DANGER—DANGER—DANGER
MUST READ COMPLETELY !

Now that I have your attention, please bear with me…...This may seem to be redundant, but anything worth repeating, is worth repeating twice as the old saying goes.
This newsletter is going to cover a recently discovered subject matter of the very most importance to everyone who owns vehicles of any kind, be it, automotive, trucking, construction equipment, etc. The results are in with very dismaying reports concerning the newest API engine oil specifications, SM / CJ-4.
To put it very bluntly and to the point, the newest specifications for both gas and diesel have not been satisfactory for use in engines prior to 2007.
In the past, when engine oils changed formulation to meet the most up-to-date specs, those formulas proved to be what is known in the industry as “backward compatible.” This simply means that the year in which the oil met the new specs and took effect for the new rating, it was perfectly alright for use in older vehicles. To my knowledge, at least over the past 22 years, there has never been a problem with oil meeting backward compatible status.
The latest API specification, SM/CJ-4 does not seem to be working out to be backward compatible, even though we have been given assurances that it would be. In a nutshell, this very well may cost the owners millions upon millions of dollars due to premature wear in both gasoline and diesel engines.
The following will show you why the concern:
GASOLINE SERVICE RATING “SM”
The newest gasoline engine oil service classification is API: “SM.” One of the primary reasons why the EPA wanted to introduce this requirement was the concern that for engines which burned a little oil, the ZDDP (zincdialkylditiophosphate), was poisoning catalytic converters.
The major automotive manufacturers at first stated that there was no bona fide data to confirm this theory, and even today, it is still debatable. The government calls for catalytic converters to have a minimum useful life of 120,000 miles, most catalytic converters have far surpassed that mileage in use without having an abnormal amount of failures due to the so-called “poisoning.”
ZDDP is the major anti-wear additive in engine oil, it has been used for decades, it is relatively inexpensive, yet very effective. With the lowering of ZDDP in some oils, almost nothing in some other oils due to “additive drop-out conditions” (primarily in semi-synthetic and some synthetic oils), a devastating effect has occurred.
The first casualties of low-to-no ZDDP took place in high-performance gasoline and methanol fueled engines. One case which I know of “flattened” three camshafts within a two-month period in a race car situation.
Excessive valve train wear has also been experienced with this oil.
Independent engine builders recognized the problem almost immediately and started recommending to the industries they serve to use a “high-quality” oil with zinc in it for anti-wear protection. 
Most all of the majors, including those who produce private label engine oil for companies, such as for auto parts stores have changed their formulations to meet SM. You will see it on the shelves at the stores, and from the oil jobbers.
DIESEL SERVICE RATING “CJ-4” 
The newest diesel engine oil service classification is API: “CJ-4,” sometimes just referred to as “CJ.” The major cause of change for this rating was to meet the 2007 Low-Emission Diesel Engines specifications. The concern once again was due to exhaust emissions. It had been determined that on engines using a DPF (diesel particulate filter), it would be plugged up by the heavy metals in the additive package of the engine oils which were graded up to CI-4 plus. The newer diesel emissions systems can reach temperatures as high as 1,600º F.
Heavy metal additives destroy the system. Therefore any engine oil prior to CJ- 4 which is not formulated for these engines should not be used.
According to the new specs for CJ-4, the oil must contain lower levels of ZDDP, Calcium and Phosphorous, it must also not have a TBN any higher than 9. TBN is a measure of the oil’s alkaline reserve, which is used for fighting off the damaging effects of acid.
Diesel oils which are formulated for “Low-Emission Engines” when used in pre-2007 engines has been reported as having premature bearing wear in as little as 10,000 miles. First showing up on the Ford Power Stroke series 6.0 & 7.3 liter, GM’s Duramax, and Dodge / Cummins 5.9 liter engines. Commercial truck and heavy equipment application reports have not yet come in, but if the precursor is any indication, it doesn’t look good.
Furthermore, if any type of oil additive is used to help the friction modification of these oils, including molybdenum disulfide , they will also poison the system in diesel applications.
THE BAD NEWS IS:
Hopefully, you will realize the gravity of this situation. If you are involved in the servicing of pre 2007 automobiles, trucks or other equipment, you should continue to use engine oil which is NOT rated “SM/ CJ-4.” More than likely it can be the cause of premature wear in those pre- 2007 engines. Actually, as far as engine wear is concerned, it could in fact also cause more wear in the 2007 engines as well, but you increase the possibility of catalytic converter problems when the engine gets to the point in which it starts using a little oil if you use a pre– SM grade. Personally, I would think this to be minimal, and would rather replace a catalytic converter than an engine.
Many engine builders when first realizing the problem with wear in low ZDDP oils started recommending the use of a “good diesel oil” in gasoline engines. This recommendation cannot be given any longer unless the diesel specification is CI-4 or previous, and has a full additive package. If the oil is rated SM/CJ, you donot have a full additive package for the older engines. Generally if you see an oil with a label stating “For Low-Emission Engines”, it will NOT have a full additive package which gives the full protection needed for older engines.
You have now heard the bad news about engine oil, as the old saying goes “A word to the wise is sufficient.”
THE GOOD NEWS IS:
A completely unprecedented decision concerning new engine oil specifications by Southwestern Petroleum Corporation with their SWEPCO brand 306 Supreme Formula Engine Oil has been made. Usually in the past when a specification rating went into effect, they have been right in there with the new specs and introduced any changes in formulation into the product when it was time to do so. However, in this case, when the specs went into effect last October, they had held back on re-formulating to meet them.
I am very pleased to inform our valued customers and prospects that we will continue to provide swepco 306 Supreme Formula Engine Oil with a full-bodied additive package, rated at SL/CI-4 Plus formula in the following weights: 10W30, 15W40 and 20W50. For engines requiring 5W30, it is rated SJ/CI-4. The TBN on
this oil is 10.3, vs. the newer 9.0 max for diesel. The detergent, dispersant and antiwear (zinc) levels are still higher than most other oils on the market rated SL/ CI-4.
SWEPCO is not going to introduce a SM/CJ product into the market until more testing has been completed and they are able to supply an oil which will surpass the needs of the specification without sacrificing the protection you have come to rely on with SWEPCO lubricants.
In any case, it will not be a reformulated “306” oil. The 306 will remain an SL/CI-4 for pre-2007 engines. ~~~~~~.
Ford Recalls Super Duty Trucks
Ford Motor Company is voluntarily recalling 37,400 Super Duty pickups, part of the automaker’s top-selling F-Series, after dealers reported flames coming from the trucks’ tailpipes. Bloomberg News reported.
The recall covers 2008-model Super Duty trucks with 6.4-liter diesel engines built by Navistar International Corp., according to Ford spokesman Dan Jarvis. About 8,400 of the trucks were sold, and 29,000 more remain on dealer lots.
Dealers won’t be able to sell the trucks until the pickups get a computer software update, and owners of recalled vehicles will bring them to dealerships for upgrades to be paid for my Ford, Jarvis said.
Ford received reports from dealers in Texas and Canada about tailpipe flames, Bloomberg said. The Texas incident caused a small grass fire.
Chrysler Recalls 86,000 Ram Trucks
Chrysler is recalling some 2006 Dodge Ram pickup trucks because their front wheel bearings may not have enough grease. The action includes as many as 86,333 of the pickups built between Nov. 7, 2005 and April 27,2006, the company told the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The problem can causenoise and vibration that if not addressed could lead to a loss of control and a crash.
The recall effects Chrysler’s biggestselling model in the U.S. Dodge Ram pickups accounted for 364,177, or 17% of the 2.14 million cars and trucks they sold last year, Bloomberg said.




Article Date: Nov 27, 2007
Car Accociations: MINI,NEW_MINI
Hits: 179


----------



## reachtreeservi (Dec 23, 2007)

Man, you sure know alot about oil Frank...:jawdrop: 
Thanks for the info !


----------



## Frank Boyer (Dec 23, 2007)

It is well known in the "industry" and a lot of people are going to have trouble before they "know". So watch what type of oil that you use. The newer SM/CJ - LE oils are bad news for older engines and flat tappet engines. The additives that they took out have been there since the late 50's and made a big difference as anti wear additives.


----------



## Fuzly (Dec 23, 2007)

DarylB said:


> This my friend is the truth. I've been pro-diesel for 6 years now, and will never own another gas-engined truck!
> 
> Diesels work fine in the cold, given time to Warm up, and you run a Winter Cover when it's COLD outside. They also have block heaters which work well to get you warmed up quicker on those really cold days, but as mentioned above - short trips in cold weather aren't good for a diesel, the engine needs to hit
> operating temp and run for a bit to ensure the fuel is being burned completely.
> ...



Actually, it's in Loyal 

It's a couple hour drive, but may be a good day trip on a day off.

Cool site! noticed that J.K. runs block heater and oil pan heater on his trucks for our lovely Wisconsin winters.

Thanks


----------



## Fuzly (Dec 23, 2007)

Thanks everybody for the replies-keep 'em coming.

I'm not worried about the cold weather anymore. Letting the glow plugs cycle and oil pan heater should do the trick. Plus the snow gets plowed here, big rigs still on the road, and school buses running with the cold weather, and those vehicles are all diesels.

I live out in the sticks, and don't make short trips. So mileage is a consideration for me. I saw 14 and 18 mpg mentioned, thats great for a big truck. 

As far as trailer pulling, it's kind of a chicken before the egg thing. My Ford Ranger is my largest vehicle. I'm very happy with it overall and when pulling my 5x8 utility trailer, but anything bigger gets not fun quick. So if I had a truck better at trailer pulling, I would be pulling trailers a lot more often 

And the possibilities for modification-another way you guys have found to help me spend my money!


----------



## spacemule (Dec 23, 2007)

It's been my experience that the Cummins starts a lot better in cold weather than the Powerstroke. Powerstroke starts ok in the cold if everything is perfect, but if your glowplugs aren't working you can forget about it. I view this as a design flaw. An engine should not need glowplugs to start reliably in cold weather, unless you're dealing with arctic temperature.


----------



## Nuzzy (Dec 23, 2007)

spacemule said:


> It's been my experience that the Cummins starts a lot better in cold weather than the Powerstroke. Powerstroke starts ok in the cold if everything is perfect, but if your glowplugs aren't working you can forget about it. I view this as a design flaw. An engine should not need glowplugs to start reliably in cold weather, unless you're dealing with arctic temperature.





It has also been my experience that Cummins start much better in the cold. Of course, Cummins don't have glow plugs anyways. They have a manifold heater


----------



## STLfirewood (Dec 24, 2007)

If you want to get a Dodge truck let me know. I work here and will get you a Friends an Family discount. If you buy by the end of the year I can get you an employee discount. That will knock off 5k or better and you get the rebates also. I have a couple discounts to give away before they are useless at the end of the year.

Scott


----------



## Fuzly (Dec 24, 2007)

Some days I think Algore might have a point, the winters are just not as severe here as they were 20 years ago. Less snow and less cold.

However, we still get a week or two most winters where it hangs at -20 F to -30 F. That's probably no big deal to the Minnesota/N Dakota/U.P./Canada gang.


----------



## Fuzly (Dec 24, 2007)

eric_271 said:


> Dodge v10 could pull some kind of load at a cost of 3 to 5 mpg. Get a diesel if you want an engine that does not know weather its pulling a heavy load or no load. MPG stays about the same with heavy load or no load avg 18mpg with my cummins.



Yikes! The V10s seem to be popping up on used lots around here-no wonder!

Nice truck, BTW.


----------



## eric_271 (Dec 24, 2007)

Fuzly said:


> Yikes! The V10s seem to be popping up on used lots around here-no wonder!
> 
> Nice truck, BTW.



Thanks Fuzly. Wanted one for ever. Now I dont know why I waited so long to get it. The v10 one of our formen had would pull a heavy load like no gas engine I'd ever seen and it was stock but he did his fuel mileage on paper and 5mpg was best it would do with a heavy load. And I choke on 18mpg.


----------



## jcbklln (Dec 24, 2007)

*true diesel or conversions*

It's my understanding that the Dodge is the only true diesel in any half ton or 3/4 ton. The Chevy's and Ford's are conversions. The same is true for most one tons as well. The dodge is a v-6 and made for pulling.
I only have a half ton GMC as of now, but I've been looking too.


----------



## clearance (Dec 24, 2007)

jcbklln said:


> It's my understanding that the Dodge is the only true diesel in any half ton or 3/4 ton. The Chevy's and Ford's are conversions. The same is true for most one tons as well. The dodge is a v-6 and made for pulling.
> I only have a half ton GMC as of now, but I've been looking too.



Welcome to the site, merry ho ho. The Dodge diesel is a Cummins I-6, not a V.


----------



## spacemule (Dec 24, 2007)

clearance said:


> Welcome to the site, merry ho ho. The Dodge diesel is a Cummins I-6, not a V.


Yup. Probably why they sound more like a big truck--big trucks are I-6's as well.


----------



## Frank Boyer (Dec 24, 2007)

jcbklln said:


> It's my understanding that the Dodge is the only true diesel in any half ton or 3/4 ton. The Chevy's and Ford's are conversions. The same is true for most one tons as well. The dodge is a v-6 and made for pulling.
> I only have a half ton GMC as of now, but I've been looking too.



The Cummins is a straight 6. The Ford V8 is an International and the GM V8 is an Isuzu.


----------



## clearance (Dec 24, 2007)

spacemule said:


> Yup. Probably why they sound more like a big truck--big trucks are I-6's as well.



Most are, but how about them Jimmy screamers V-8 71s, V-8 92s, V-12 71s and so on. When you have an offroad logging truck with one of those V-12s go screaming by, it don't really sound like a diesel


----------



## 04ultra (Dec 24, 2007)

clearance said:


> Most are, but how about them Jimmy screamers V-8 71s, V-8 92s, V-12 71s and so on. When you have an offroad logging truck with one of those V-12s go screaming by, it don't really sound like a diesel




you forgot V-12 92's 


Also the Cat 3408 

Mack E9 500 

Cummins VT 903 





here is a Old Detroit 6V 92T
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgVupkhE2Eo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dN9MNoZQjCs&feature=related


Damn I hate the way them old Detroits sound..........
.


----------



## jcbklln (Dec 24, 2007)

That's my bad. Of course the dodge isn't a v-6. 
That was part of my whole point, it is completely different than the other "diesel" engines.


----------



## clearance (Dec 24, 2007)

04ultra said:


> you forgot V-12 92's
> 
> 
> Also the Cat 3408
> ...



I ain't no truck driver, I just know those Jimmies, I like that sound especially across a valley, in a big truck or a yarder, you just know something cool is happening.


----------



## grandpatractor (Dec 25, 2007)

clearance said:


> I ain't no truck driver, I just know those Jimmies, I like that sound especially across a valley, in a big truck or a yarder, you just know something cool is happening.



Yup those older two-stroke diesels just loved to run with your foot in the throttle. 
Especially if the blower seals went out and it started runnig away on its own crankcase oil:jawdrop:


----------



## 04ultra (Dec 25, 2007)

grandpatractor said:


> Yup those older two-stroke diesels just loved to run with your foot in the throttle.
> Especially if the blower seals went out and it started runnig away on its own crankcase oil:jawdrop:






Vrrrrrrrrrrrooooommmmm Ka Booooommmmm!!!!  




.


----------



## Tree Sling'r (Dec 25, 2007)

I got an F250 7.3 with 4" exhaust all the way back from the turbo, and AFE intake and an Edge programmer with the A-pod full of Auto Meter Gauges. She rips, but my best mileage has been 18.7 freeway, 13.8 pulling my 25ft traveler trailer.
Oh yeah, also have an Apline system that runs my iPod from the deck. :rockn:


----------



## redprospector (Dec 25, 2007)

grandpatractor said:


> Yup those older two-stroke diesels just loved to run with your foot in the throttle.
> Especially if the blower seals went out and it started runnig away on its own crankcase oil:jawdrop:



The last one I had do that was a 97 Ford powerstroke. I locked it down, stuck it in 5th gear, and dumped the clutch. That killed it and saved the engine (for a while).

In my opinion, if you are regularly pulling heavy loads, Buy a diesel.
If not, go ahead and get the gas rig. If you buy a diesel for savings in mileage, and such you'll be disapointed because the maintenance and parts cost will eat that up pretty quick.

Andy


----------



## Freakingstang (Dec 25, 2007)

jcbklln said:


> It's my understanding that the Dodge is the only true diesel in any half ton or 3/4 ton. The Chevy's and Ford's are conversions. The same is true for most one tons as well. The dodge is a v-6 and made for pulling.
> I only have a half ton GMC as of now, but I've been looking too.



I wouldn't say that about the ford....the powerstroke and older non turbo 7.3's are international diesels. The started life as the 6.9 which is a primitave, but true diesel used in many industrial applications.

The newer chevy diesels (non duramax) were volvo or isuzu's made----> not a conversion

The only conversions that come to mind are the early 80's GM 350 diesel/propane/natural gas contraptions.

I don't know much about the duramax other than they run like raped apes and get great milelage.


----------



## Austin1 (Dec 25, 2007)

Since some were talking about diesel conversion engines ,remember the 5.7 diesel's from the late 70s and early 80s that GM made? Yep the ones based on a 350 Olds block what a piece of junk! Great mileage was the only thing they had going for them.The heads would go 20,000km before blowing a head gasket. No power, even the glove box on a full sized half ton has a warning in it not to put a camper on the truck. I have one of these trucks a 1980 Half ton I remember when my friends dad bought it new complete with 273 rear axle ratio But after they had it for 5 years they put a 425 vintage 1968 in it can you say torque! and a set of 343gears.I bought this truck 3 years ago complete with rebuilt 350 olds and tranny and the diesel emblems on the fenders.
If I was to buy a diesel it would be the 12 valve older cummins. I have some experience with the 7.3 ford in are shop trucks it's a true diesel but not a good one imo. Have to wait and see how the new smaller one holds up ford has.


----------



## Nuzzy (Dec 25, 2007)

redprospector said:


> If you buy a diesel for savings in mileage, and such you'll be disapointed because the maintenance and parts cost will eat that up pretty quick.
> 
> Andy





True of the old diesels, but not the trucks nowdays. The maintenance now is basically oil changes and go  

Sure the new ones take more oil than a gasser, but the go twice as long between changes. All the drive train components are same as their gas counterpart trucks. And of course, the rest of the truck will probably be gone long before the motor! Well, Cummins and Dmax anyways... Ford hasn't made a decent diesel since the 7.3 :biggrinbounce2:


----------



## Jumper (Dec 25, 2007)

My work truck is a 2007 Dodge 2500 with the Hemi, great truck and quite fast, lots of grunt and 345 hp, but the 6.8 mph we get running around the mine would put me off this vehicle as an owned drive unless it had a diesel, about 40% better milieage from those that own them.


----------



## Wood Junkie (Dec 25, 2007)

Austin1 said:


> Since some were talking about diesel conversion engines ,remember the 5.7 diesel's from the late 70s and early 80s that GM made? Yep the ones based on a 350 Olds block what a piece of junk! Great mileage was the only thing they had going for them..



I know the HP Olds guys like those diesel blocks for a high hp gas conversion eng........if you still have it,might be worth checking into and ebaying it! I had a 68 455 rocket (375 horse 510ft #'s of torque stock)that needed rebuilt and sold it on ebay for $500


----------



## Fuzly (Dec 25, 2007)

Nuzzy said:


> And of course, the rest of the truck will probably be gone long before the motor! Well, Cummins and Dmax anyways... Ford hasn't made a decent diesel since the 7.3 :biggrinbounce2:



So, what do you guys think about brands?  

I've heard something similar locally, Dodge if you want a manual transmission, GM with Allison if you want an auto, stay away from Ford unless you want an older truck.

My cousin bought a new diesel F350 with a little dump bed for his landscape business a couple years ago. He said it is a great truck if it would ever run, spent more time at the dealership than his shop the first year. 

Maybe they are getting the problems ironed out, he hasn't mentioned it for a while. I'm kinda leaning toward Dodge, I like the way they look and the Cummins reputation, but new truck is still a definite maybe-possibly even wishful thinking for me.


----------



## Nuzzy (Dec 26, 2007)

Fuzly said:


> So, what do you guys think about brands?
> 
> I've heard something similar locally, Dodge if you want a manual transmission, GM with Allison if you want an auto, stay away from Ford unless you want an older truck.
> 
> ...




Yes, Dodge autos SUCK unless you build them to handle power. And there are a couple known issues with the 2nd gen 24V cummins that will ruin your day if you don't address like the VP44 starving and costing a cool 2k  However, they are the only true medium duty diesel of the big three, and insane power can be had for cheap! 12Valve cummins can get 150hp at the rear wheels for free with a grinder to their fuel plate :jawdrop: And 24Valves can easily add a $600 box good for and additional 150horse and 350torque, and that only scratches the surface...

The new Chevys ride like cars with the IFS so you'll get the best driveability. And the Duramaxs are cranking out some serious power when bombed. The Allison will hold up great to an unmodded Dmax, but will also have to be built when you start adding power


----------



## eric_271 (Dec 26, 2007)

3rd generation ram 2500 4x4 rides better than most cars. Mom drives a Mercedes and wife drives a Concorde and both admit it rides and drives better than their cars and interior is compared to luxury. Trust me you are not tired at the end of a long trip.


----------



## Buzz 880 (Dec 26, 2007)

Nuzzy said:


> Yes, Dodge autos SUCK unless you build them to handle power. And there are a couple known issues with the 2nd gen 24V cummins that will ruin your day if you don't address like the VP44 starving and costing a cool 2k  However, they are the only true medium duty diesel of the big three, and insane power can be had for cheap! 12Valve cummins can get 150hp at the rear wheels for free with a grinder to their fuel plate :jawdrop: And 24Valves can easily add a $600 box good for and additional 150horse and 350torque, and that only scratches the surface...
> 
> The new Chevys ride like cars with the IFS so you'll get the best driveability. And the Duramaxs are cranking out some serious power when bombed. The Allison will hold up great to an unmodded Dmax, but will also have to be built when you start adding power



I have a 2004 dodge 3500 srw crew cab 5.9 cummins auto tranny and have not had any trouble with it yet 275000 km on it.Pulls my 28 foot fifth wheel like it's not even there even through the moutains of the west coast.It also hauls my six tone dump trailer with 4 face cord of wood delivers around 300-400 face cords a year and never has any trouble.I know the old Dodge auto tranny's were bad but i think the newer ones are alright my buddy has 656000 km on his 2001 and hasn't had any trouble.If you are going to buy a new diesel and work it buy a Dodge or ford i don't think the Gm's like the working thing to much.


----------



## bigbadbob (Dec 26, 2007)

I have a 98.5 Dodge, first 24V.
The 98.5 to 03 have some issues
Bad lift pumps
Bad Injection pumps
Bad #53 blocks prone to cracking.
Some front end 'Death Wobble' issues 
03 and up is good
98 12valve quad cab 5 speed sport is the holy grail of dodge diesels!!
Mine has big injectors, chip ,and trans mods and torque convertor, about 340hp 650 torque 19mpg in town 24 hwy.
I haven't had any of ther above problems 'YET' 167,000km's
They all have their own problems IMO
Beats a gas pot hands down.
Also have a 01 VW TDi and a 84 TD


----------



## Nuzzy (Dec 26, 2007)

Buzz 880 said:


> I have a 2004 dodge 3500 srw crew cab 5.9 cummins auto tranny and have not had any trouble with it yet 275000 km on it.Pulls my 28 foot fifth wheel like it's not even there even through the moutains of the west coast.It also hauls my six tone dump trailer with 4 face cord of wood delivers around 300-400 face cords a year and never has any trouble.I know the old Dodge auto tranny's were bad but i think the newer ones are alright my buddy has 656000 km on his 2001 and hasn't had any trouble.If you are going to buy a new diesel and work it buy a Dodge or ford i don't think the Gm's like the working thing to much.




Yes, the 3rd gen auto is holding up a LOT better than the 2nd gens. They still aren't perfect, but certainly far better! Are either of the trucks you spoke of bombed? Seems like that is what really gets to the trannys fast is adding plug in modules/injectors/etc... 

And some people never have problems with them. Either way, there's a reason most people doing heavy towing or building NHRDA trucks use Dodges


----------



## grandpatractor (Dec 26, 2007)

Fuzly said:


> So, what do you guys think about brands?
> 
> I've heard something similar locally, Dodge if you want a manual transmission, GM with Allison if you want an auto, stay away from Ford unless you want an older truck.



Pretty much right on in my experience. Dodge autotrannys have had some problems as well as fuel system on 24 valve. There is an idiot light kit that will tell you when the transfer pump quits and save ya money in the long run. I also don't like their front ends. The one sway link always wears like fast and gets loose. Then the truck wanders all over. 

Ford 7.3' are good. I would avoid the 6.0's 

Chevys I can't say much bad about. Very few problems with the ones I have dealt with. 

Just my $.02


----------



## MikE2 (Dec 28, 2007)

I'm the exception to the rule about going to a diesel and then back to a gasser. I've had 4 diesels, and then with my last 2 vehicles they have been gassers. One of them a Chevrolet 8.1 liter and it tows every bit as well as my best diesel did, maybe even a little faster. It does, however get half the gas milage doing it, but I'm OK with that because its not all that often when I tow anything heavy. This spring I'm planning on buying another one ton truck and I've just about set my mind on the Ford V10 gasser, but only because GM is not offering the 8.1 liter anymore. Diesels cost a lot more up front, they cost more to maintain, and with the recent EPA regulations and complications put on the engines they are not any more reliable then anything else. In fact, with my last diesel it was the most unreliable vehicle I've ever had. I don't see it being worth it to own a diesel unless you are towing with it, and I mean towing a lot. Or unless you just want a diesel for the coolness factor and how easy they are to get power out of by chipping them up. Me, personally, I prefer the powerband and wide RPM range the gas engine offers. Thats the biggest reason I went back to gas over the diesel.


----------



## Dok (Dec 30, 2007)

I can't disagree with anything you said, MikE2. Diesels cost way too much new and cost more to maintain. My 7.3L Powerstroke gets 18mpg, my neighbors '06 6L gets 16mpg, my cousins brand new 08 6.4L gets 14mpg and I hear Dodge and Chevys new low emissions 2008 engines are getting similar. With diesel costing $3.70/gal and gas costing $3.14/gal the MPG argument isn't as strong as it used to be. I love my diesel and would hate to go back to a gasser but I also can't argue with anything you said. 

For a personal truck, not for commercial use, let someone else take the depreciation hit the first three years. Used trucks take a big hit in the retail price when they cross 100k miles and a diesel that is taken care of is just getting broken in. You have to do your homework to make sure you are getting a good one because you will be flying without a warranty but you can save big $$$. Just a thought.
Dok


----------



## HEAVY FUEL (Dec 30, 2007)

Frank Boyer said:


> The 2008 diesel's need low sulfur (15 ppm) fuel and SM/CJ (Low Emission) motor oil. The new oil has the anti wear additives removed form the oil to extend cat life. You must run the new oil and low sulfur fuel in the 2008 diesels.
> 
> Frank, I believe you mean the 2008 diesels need ULTRA LOW sulfer (15 ppm).
> What is refered to as LOW sulfer is still 500 ppm. At least around here.
> ...


----------



## Dok (Dec 30, 2007)

jonseredsjonny said:


> Fuel mileage is a whopping 4.8. Same horsepower truck 10 years ago would get around 6.4.



+1 on that, after the switch to ULSD I've noticed lower power and lower mileage. 
Dok


----------



## StihltheOne (Jan 15, 2008)

Mine is a 96 club 4x4 with the 12 valve, imho the best engine for me. I have lots of "jewelry" under the hood. Great milage, Im not going to win any races, but the old rip never says die when she is a pulling.


----------



## Freakingstang (Jan 15, 2008)

Jumper said:


> My work truck is a 2007 Dodge 2500 with the Hemi, great truck and quite fast, lots of grunt and 345 hp, but the 6.8 mph we get running around the mine would put me off this vehicle as an owned drive unless it had a diesel, about 40% better milieage from those that own them.



My new work truck is a 2007 2500 with the hemi..4x4 with 4.10's It has a utility body and holds lots of tools. It weighs 8K fully loaded with a #2 diesel tank. Highway MPG is about 10 at best. Significantly less in stop and go. Pulling our 8K generators it got 4.4 mpg coming staight across new york into ohio on I-90 (totally flat). It would not hold 65 mph in drive (tow haul on, and tried with OD off). It would slow down, down shift to 2nd and scream at 5500-6000 and never shift out of 2nd with the cruise on. same deal with the cruise off.

I absolutely hate this truck, the horrible powerband, and the milelage. Not too mention 3 blown speakers at 4K miles, and the squeaks and rattles. There seems to be a new one every day. can't wait to run this one into the ground, or hit 100K miles, which ever comes first. I'm figuring the tranny will bite the dust by 60K.

It has no bottom end what-so-ever. It runs great from 70-100 mph, but everything inbetween it is a turd.

My old work turck was a 2005 2500HD chevy with the 6.0L. 4x4 utility bed, same setup with 4.10's, but wieghed 8200 fully loaded (tools, fuel tank, etc.)

Truck got 14 mpg on the highway (75-80 mph), 9-10 pulling 8K trailers and had a ton of power. It had all the bottom end you needed to properly overload the truck. It seemed to get the same milelage whether you were beating the snot out of it, or taking it easy.

I would buy the chevy in a heartbeat (lol, I'm a ford guy, lol). I would never buy the hemi 2500 if my life depended on it. It makes a ton of power at high RPM and would be a great hot rod engine in a light car, or 2wd half ton, but not for something that actually has to haul or tow anything because of it's major lack in bottom end torque.


----------



## Nuzzy (Jan 15, 2008)

Freakingstang said:


> I would never buy the hemi 2500 if my life depended on it. It makes a ton of power and would be a great hot rod engine in a light car, or 2wd half ton, but not for something that actually has to haul or tow anything.




I agree fully!

If it's a Dodge 2500 or 3500, it better be a Cummins. Buying that truck without a diesel might just be the definition of crazy... 

















And yes, I owned a '96 3500 with a V10


----------



## MikE2 (Jan 15, 2008)

Sounds like your Heim is seriously undergeared for the ammount of work you're asking of it. Going from 3.54's (or whatever it is) to something like 4.56's is a night and day difference and can really change your whole opinion on the truck.


----------



## Freakingstang (Jan 16, 2008)

MikE2 said:


> Sounds like your Heim is seriously undergeared for the ammount of work you're asking of it. Going from 3.54's (or whatever it is) to something like 4.56's is a night and day difference and can really change your whole opinion on the truck.



It has 4.10's, although the final drive ratio with the 6 speed auto is probably .0000000003 : 1, lol. The corporate lease plan isn't going to pay to put 5.13's in it, that is about what it needs to be worth a crap. 

The thing was a turd, with just the empty utility bed (no tools, no weight in it other the the 1000lbs or so of the aftermarket bed on it. it is the exact same setup as my chevy, same gears, just the hemi instead of the 6.0L. The Hemi will not hold 80 MPH on the freeway in OD if you meet a small incline or hill. I'm not talking a mountain, just a small incline. If you don't put your foot to the floor, it just drops speed, until it gets to 65 or so, then down shifts. If you try to ease into the gas to maintain speed, it drops from OD to 2nd.

Like I said, it would be a great motor in a 1/2 ton, or a car (magnum, charger hot rod, etc). It just doesn't produce the torque down low that is should.

The engine cylinder cutout thing is about a joke to. I think it make the milelage worse, rather than better. (drops out 4 cyls at cruising speed in normal mode, not in tow haul mode, or od off). It get better milegae with OD off. seriously.


----------



## MikE2 (Jan 16, 2008)

Freakingstang said:


> The thing was a turd, with just the empty utility bed (no tools, no weight in it other the the 1000lbs or so of the aftermarket bed on it...... The Hemi will not hold 80 MPH on the freeway in OD if you meet a small incline or hill...... It get better milegae with OD off. seriously.



All a dead indication of axle gearing too high for the job you're trying to do. You'd have a whole new truck if they did put those 5.13's in it.


----------

