How come most Dodge truck owners...

[3991v]

.. are so FUCKING ARROGANT?

"Dude, your Chevy FUCKING SUCKS!!! WOOO DODGEEE!!!!"
"DODGE POWER FTW!"
"GO DODGE!!! HELL YEA"
"fuck ford!!! go dodge!!!"
"My dodge will rip any Ford or Chevy a new asshole"

Seriously, people have too much pride in their dead or dying garbage emitters :mad: A majority of the dodge comments are either "Dodge is so much better than *brand*".. or "Fuck *brand*,, GO DODGE!!"

/rant

(If you own a dodge and aren't like this, then no offense)

[JC316]

The last two trucks my dad has had were Rams a 94 and a 98. Primarily because the Chevy's are too damned expensive around here. The dodge ram was at it's best in 98. The 94 went to 300,000 miles and the 98 is now at 200,000 miles.

The power isn't equal to chevy in the 90's, the gas mileage is horrible too. I had an 88 Silverado with the 350 while my Dad had the 94 ram with the 318. I got 17MPG where he got 14.

I do remember something hilarious though. His just died on the freeway one day, luckily he was right next to a Dodge dealership so he swung in there to store it till we could come back. We came back alright, with my old beat up Silverado and trailered his Dodge, out of the Dodge dealership with a Chevy. It would have made a great Chevy commercial.

[3991v]

lol @ chevy towing dodge.

I'm not a fanboy when it comes to brands, but dodge is last on my list. I wasn't trying to be offensive or anything, except those comments just piss me off.

[JC316]

lol @ chevy towing dodge.

I'm not a fanboy when it comes to brands, but dodge is last on my list. I wasn't trying to be offensive or anything, except those comments just piss me off.

Yeah, that was definitely funny as hell. Dodge makes shit, plain and simple. Especially in the early 90's.

That 94 ram, the motor ran forever, but the rest sucked. It rode like a log wagon, it would wear out 50K mile tires in 20K miles due to cupping and the transmission had to be replaced at 50K miles. The engine had to be rebuilt at 80K miles.

I had a Chrysler Lebaron.... It had to have an engine and transmission by 100K miles. It had the mitsubishi 3.0L V6, but the transmission slipped into 2nd gear at 70MPH and the engine went boom. The Intrepids have a reputation for 20K mile engines. Same for seabrings and Neons.

There are exceptions to the rule. The 98 dodge is awesome. They fixed the ride and suspension issues and the 360 is bullet proof. The tranny is still going strong. I knew a lady that had an intrepid from the showroom floor, had 220K miles and never need so much as a water pump.

[FordGT90Concept]

I've ran into Chevy and Ford fanbois too.

[Wile E]

Yeah, you'll find fanboys for all makes. I hate Dodge, personally. When I was a mech, Chrysler products kept the garage in business. lol.

[3991v]

@ JC, my friend's mom had an Interpid a while back, so many problems it wasn't even funny. Dunno, they just need to get their game in gear.

Yeah, you'll find fanboys for all makes. I hate Dodge, personally. When I was a mech, Chrysler products kept the garage in business. lol.

I guess they are good for something at least, kudos to dodge

[FordGT90Concept]

Chrysler in general has been craptastic since the 1950s. They just need to die already.

GM has been running themselves into the ground since the 1980s.

Ford is too truck-heavy, until recently.

[SK-1]

http://img.techpowerup.org/090824/Capture433.jpg

[1Kurgan1]

The Intrepids have a reputation for 20K mile engines. Same for seabrings and Neons.

A guy at work recently picked up a 2002 Intrepid with 17k miles for $150 (the towing fee) motor was shot, can't remember what had happened to it.

[JC316]

A guy at work recently picked up a 2002 Intrepid with 17k miles for $150 (the towing fee) motor was shot, can't remember what had happened to it.

Yep and those motors are $2500 used at the junkyard too.

[3991v]

Damn. And I was actually considering buying an Intrepid used for $300 a few weeks back O_o

[btarunr]

"My dodge will rip any Ford or Chevy a new asshole"

Among others, this is the gayest statements of them all.

[1Kurgan1]

Yep and those motors are $2500 used at the junkyard too.

Yeah, I think he ended up selling it as he couldn't find another 2.7L (I believe) for under $2000 and that was for just the motor as he would have done all the work himself.

[Papahyooie]

I will have to admit I'm a dodge fanboy. My father had two fords growing up, one old and one new, both were terrible. The older one died (probably an 85 model or something) when I was 5 or so, the new one had so many problems that he got rid of it and bought a chevy. That was a good truck and lasted awhile, I didnt really have any beef with it. In 2000 he bought a new Durango with the 360 and it was a beast. It actually towed his 18-wheeler (this is a gasoline engine mind you) I learned to drive in it and I absolutely loved it. One of these days i'm going to get one for myself. Now he has a massive 2500 with like, (i think) an 8 litre v-10. Its a tank and its badass. As for cars, I like chevys mostly if we're talking new stuff. However Im a musclecar guy, and in that department you just can't beat a mopar. Nowadays though, I will have to admit Ford is probably on top of the truck business, deisel and gasoline alike, even if I dont like them.

So i guess really my favorite is dodge, but im not really gonna put down anything else. Dodge owners, yea they're usually more vocal about it... but alot of times, in my experience, they can back up thier words. Everybody is good at something, or at least was at one point.

[FordGT90Concept]

It actually towed his 18-wheeler (this is a gasoline engine mind you)
Must have been empty, downhill, with a tail-wind, and all axels free rolling. XD


Heh, just guiding it--not towing it. ;)

[1Kurgan1]

Must have been empty, downhill, with a tail-wind, and all axels free rolling. XD


Heh, just guiding it--not towing it. ;)

lol, but I agree, I can't remember what the cab to a 18 wheeler weighs alone, but I'm pretty sure it's around 10 - 11 tons. Then another 4 - 6 tons for an empty trailer depending what kind of trailer.

[FordGT90Concept]

The tractor varies greatly (wheelbase, height, sleeper/no sleeper, size of engine/transmission, old/new, etc.), as does the trailer (high boy, low boy, van, refrigerated van, livestock, hopper, etc.).

[1Kurgan1]

The tractor varies greatly (wheelbase, height, sleeper/no sleeper, size of engine/transmission, old/new, etc.), as does the trailer (high boy, low boy, van, refrigerated van, livestock, hopper, etc.).

Yeah I suppose, I was just going off the one my dad drives.

[FordGT90Concept]

Ballpark estimates:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070803150534AAI9Msz

Tractor: 14,000 to 23,000 pounds
Trailer: 11,000 to 12,000 pounds
Total: 25,000 to 35,000 pounds (12.5 to 17.5 tons)

Your estimate is pretty close...


If I remember, I'll ask my dad what his Volvo VN 780 (http://www.volvo.com/trucks/na/en-us/products/vn/vn670/vn670.htm) and empty reefer weigh.


Edit: His truck is 36,000 pounds with an empty reefer. He says his truck is on the heavy end and that most are between 32,000 and 34,000 pounds. That means a range of 16 to 18 tons.

[Papahyooie]

Im not joking! It really did. Yes, it was empty. It was a 98 freightliner, with an aluminum trailer, not sure of the brand, i think eagle. His lower gears went out, and he couldnt get moving. The durango towed it up to 40mph at which point the truck could pull itself. Im not making this shit up!

[FordGT90Concept]

That's feasible and no, in that scenario, the Durango isn't special. Pretty much any V8 could pull it off without too much difficulty.

[JC316]

The 360 does have a shitload of towing power for the V8's in those years, I have yet to find a car that will bog it on a trailer, including a 4000lbs Cadillac. The 318 in the 94 Ram that my dad had was terrible for towing, it would bog on anything over 3500lbs. My silverado was the 350 with 4:10 gears...... Not much would out tow it.

[Papahyooie]

Must have been empty, downhill, with a tail-wind, and all axels free rolling. XD


Heh, just guiding it--not towing it. ;)

That's feasible and no, in that scenario, the Durango isn't special. Pretty much any V8 could pull it off without too much difficulty.


huh?

[Steevo]

Towing at 40 MPH isn't really leaving first gear.


Try Eisenhower Tunnel Silverthorn side towing anything. Unless you have forced induction and enough junk from it you are going to fall short, overheat, or just blow a engine I laughed at eh idiots who are on the side of the raod with a dumbstrucl look on their face, and most of the time it is the "good old boys" who are there with their trucks.


Pulling a popup and with a cartop on the Highlander with a few upgrades it had a hard time maintaining 55MPH. Air drag was a big part of it, but most vehicles at that altitude suffer from alot of power loss (app 29% less)

[FordGT90Concept]

huh?
It was empty, relatively flat, and no axels were locked. If it were loaded, it wouldn't work. If it were up a good grade, it wouldn't work. If any of the axels were locked up, it wouldn't work.


Pulling a popup and with a cartop on the Highlander with a few upgrades it had a hard time maintaining 55MPH. Air drag was a big part of it, but most vehicles at that altitude suffer from alot of power loss (app 29% less)
Any Toyota is going to struggle hauling/towing pretty much anything.

[JC316]

Towing at 40 MPH isn't really leaving first gear.


Try Eisenhower Tunnel Silverthorn side towing anything. Unless you have forced induction and enough junk from it you are going to fall short, overheat, or just blow a engine I laughed at eh idiots who are on the side of the raod with a dumbstrucl look on their face, and most of the time it is the "good old boys" who are there with their trucks.


Pulling a popup and with a cartop on the Highlander with a few upgrades it had a hard time maintaining 55MPH. Air drag was a big part of it, but most vehicles at that altitude suffer from alot of power loss (app 29% less)

You in Colorado? I have been in the Eisenhower tunnel several times on the way to Black Hawk. The altitude is 100% true. My parents motor home has a carbureted 454 in it. Down here in Texas, it pulls like crazy, up in Colorado, we are lucky to make 20MPH on a steep hill in 1st gear.

Even their old S10 blazer with the 200HP 4.3L couldn't hardly do anything in over drive up there.

[FordGT90Concept]

I've been up there with an E-150 and an F-150, both the 351 cu in Windsor engine. The F-150 had absolutely no problems even on the old stage coach road (20 miles up that mofo takes 4 hours). The E-150 couldn't even make it up the first hill. XD Had to go down to Pepboys and they did a lot of work to it (air filters and what not). Once the gunk was out of it, it worked fine as well. The F-150 was full (extended cab, long bed with topper).

The vehicle has to have great airflow to work well in the mountains, that's for sure.

[JC316]

I've been up there with an E-150 and an F-150, both the 351 cu in Windsor engine. The F-150 had absolutely no problems even on the old stage coach road (20 miles up that mofo takes 4 hours). The E-150 couldn't even make it up the first hill. XD Had to go down to Pepboys and they did a lot of work to it (air filters and what not). Once the gunk was out of it, it worked fine as well. The F-150 was full (extended cab, long bed with topper).

The vehicle has to have great airflow to work well in the mountains, that's for sure.

Yeah, but this motor home is 37 feet long.... A manual transmission is best in the mountains. Last few years we took a 95 Saturn SL2. With the stick I had plenty of power. And with the lack of air and the downhill stretches, I got around 48MPG.

[FordGT90Concept]

Two problems with motor homes:

1) Commecial chassis with usually consumer engines (the majority of motor homes are very under powered).

2) They have a huge profile that isn't aerodynamic at all.

Underpowered and a crapload of drag--even on flat roads with a strong wind, they can struggle.


The F-150 and E-150 have automatic transmissions. The problem is that autos rarely pick the right gear in mountainous terrain. The driver has to pick the right gear and the transmission has to obey the command. Failing either, or both, problems will arise.

[JC316]

Two problems with motor homes:

1) Commecial chassis with usually consumer engines (the majority of motor homes are very under powered).

2) They have a huge profile that isn't aerodynamic at all.

Underpowered and a crapload of drag--even on flat roads with a strong wind, they can struggle.


The F-150 and E-150 have automatic transmissions. The problem is that autos rarely pick the right gear in mountainous terrain. The driver has to pick the right gear and the transmission has to obey the command. Failing either, or both, problems will arise.

The motorhome is on a Chevy P30 van chassis. The 454 makes 240HP and 375ftlbs of torque. Not that much considering. And yeah, the tranny is never in the right gear, manual = superior.

[Steevo]

Any Toyota is going to struggle hauling/towing pretty much anything.

I like you , you're silly:p

[FordGT90Concept]

The motorhome is on a Chevy P30 van chassis. The 454 makes 240HP and 375ftlbs of torque. Not that much considering. And yeah, the tranny is never in the right gear, manual = superior.
Oh a little tike. That's still not enough power for mountain climbing (especially the torque figure). The higher your power to weight ratio, the better off you'll be.


I like you , you're silly:p
The heaviest Toyota hauler (7,200 lb GVWR):
http://www.toyota.com/tundra/

The heaviest Ford hauler (37,000 lb GVWR):
https://www.fleet.ford.com/showroom/2009fleetshowroom/2009-F750.asp


Need I say more?

[Steevo]

The ability to cool and turn RPM is what gets you over a pass, not how many HP, FT Lb or power to weight, they all help, but the number of overheated high HP cars and trucks on the side of the road is amazing when climbing.


I live here, I have fun here, and I see the idiots with their windows down and heaters on high trying to get rid of heat so they can make it over while driving 45.....as I go past running fine with the AC on the sunroof open and trailer in tow.

And we are replacing all our Fords in our fleet, they get poor mileage, have more maintainance costs, and less towing capacity than their GM counterparts. Duramax VS 350, F-150 VS 1500, F250 VS 2500, Exploder VS Trailblazer or Equinox.


They gave me a loaded Exploder for a company car, drives quiet, sound system is a bit better, fule mileage sucks donkey dick, and it feels like driving a tuna boat.

[FordGT90Concept]

Obviously you need brake, transmission, and engine cooling but that's what gets you over the mountain, not gets you over it like it wasn't even there.


In these parts, we disagree with GM being better for fleets. GM makes pickups, not trucks.

Duramax vs PowerStroke 6.4L? PowerStroke, more power and better suited to real work (trailers, heavy payloads).

F-150 vs 1500? F-150, much heavier chassis, more options, and very reliable.

F-250 vs 2500? Why? 1-ton chassis aren't much more expensive and they offer a lot more bang for the buck.

Explorer vs Trailblazer? Both are based on their truck counterparts with independant rear suspension. F-150 is a better platform so it results in a better SUV.

Equinox? The closest Ford makes to that is the Escape/Tribute/Mariner. The Escape and Tribute are segment leaders but, the 2010 model shows some promise. We'll have to wait for a head-to-head to decide which is better.


Explorers are large so milage isn't going to be the best (especially with the V8) unless it is a hybrid. Tuna boat?

[Steevo]

Obviously you need brake, transmission, and engine cooling but that's what gets you over the mountain, not gets you over it like it wasn't even there.


In these parts, we disagree with GM being better for fleets. GM makes pickups, not trucks.

Duramax vs PowerStroke 6.4L? PowerStroke, more power and better suited to real work (trailers, heavy payloads).

F-150 vs 1500? F-150, much heavier chassis, more options, and very reliable.

F-250 vs 2500? Why? 1-ton chassis aren't much more expensive and they offer a lot more bang for the buck.

Explorer vs Trailblazer? Both are based on their truck counterparts with independant rear suspension. F-150 is a better platform so it results in a better SUV.

Equinox? The closest Ford makes to that is the Escape/Tribute/Mariner. The Escape and Tribute are segment leaders but, the 2010 model shows some promise. We'll have to wait for a head-to-head to decide which is better.


Explorers are large so milage isn't going to be the best (especially with the V8) unless it is a hybrid.

Our flatbed only gets loaded with a trailer and multiple tons of product. That is all it does. We all like the duramax more, it gets beter fuel mileage, it has had few issues after the injectors were changed, (the Ford has had more injector problems, along with Turbo problems) it has less lag. Pick one. Now someone elses review of what they Ford company pays them to spew,VS real life, dovetail trailer with 10 tons on it review. Ford loses, hard.


Our F150's do weight more, get worse fule mileage, and have crappier options. Our 1500 Sierra with 245,000 miles on it, gets better fuel mileage, burns no oil, and can tow as much. The biggest difference is the first gear, Ford uses a short first so if feels like they have power, Chevy uses a taller first and it takes longer to accelerate. Chevy uses a hydroformed frame, less warpage and more strength = same towing capacity with less weight. Ford only recently started licensing this from GM, and started advertising it as their next big invention.

Trailblazer VS Exploder, I like the sound system, and quieter ride. I hate the transmission, ride, and handling. I had the brakes replaced with ceramic metallic for better braking of the fat lady. Soon I will have a car like I asked for though, I will break this Ford.


As far as cooling, next trip over I will video. We have counted the hoods, and at last count the 90-mid 00 Fords fare the worst, Chrysler coming in 2nd, and Chevy trailing with the early 90's cars and vans. Thre is nothing I love more than passing a smoking struggling Ford, Dodge or Chrysler anything with the "DTR's" sweating it out.

[FordGT90Concept]

...the Ford has had more injector problems, along with Turbo problems...
Lemme guess, the 6.0L? Those were riddled with problems. The 6.4L has a radiator problem that triggered a recall but no major issues besides that. Of the 6.0L era, most opted for the old trusty 7.3L Power Strokes. The 6.7L is coming soon.


Chevy uses a hydroformed frame, less warpage and more strength = same towing capacity with less weight. Ford only recently started licensing this from GM, and started advertising it as their next big invention.
Ford has been using fully boxed frames (http://image.sporttruck.com/f/17557020/0903st_05_z+2009_ford_f150+frame.jpg) for some time on all their F-series. That's where the industry leading GVWR comes from.

Only the front (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRfE_XAk2mE) of the Ford frame is hydroformed (can't hydroform a box very well).

[JC316]

Oh a little tike. That's still not enough power for mountain climbing (especially the torque figure). The higher your power to weight ratio, the better off you'll be.



The heaviest Toyota hauler (7,200 lb GVWR):
http://www.toyota.com/tundra/

The heaviest Ford hauler (37,000 lb GVWR):
https://www.fleet.ford.com/showroom/2009fleetshowroom/2009-F750.asp


Need I say more?

It can climb mountains when it's not hauling a tow car. Add a 4000lbs Blazer on the back of it and it really can't climb. Plus the carb never runs right in the high altitude. The thing that's a real nightmare in Colorado is the bicyclers. I fucking hate em, they have ZERO respect for the people on the road. You would think they would have the common sense to get out of the way when a 4 ton motor home is going DOWNHILL behind them.

[pepsi71ocean]

.. are so FUCKING ARROGANT?

"Dude, your Chevy FUCKING SUCKS!!! WOOO DODGEEE!!!!"
"DODGE POWER FTW!"
"GO DODGE!!! HELL YEA"
"fuck ford!!! go dodge!!!"
"My dodge will rip any Ford or Chevy a new asshole"

Seriously, people have too much pride in their dead or dying garbage emitters :mad: A majority of the dodge comments are either "Dodge is so much better than *brand*".. or "Fuck *brand*,, GO DODGE!!"

/rant

(If you own a dodge and aren't like this, then no offense)

I drive a Dodge 3500, i can tow anything i need to, and i agree i have issues with not just dodge guys, but Ford and Chevy guys who act like assholes as well.

Ive scene ford guys call shit on things just as much as the dodge guys.


Yeah, you'll find fanboys for all makes. I hate Dodge, personally. When I was a mech, Chrysler products kept the garage in business. lol.

Yea, that is because people don't do regular maintenance to their trucks. Ive done all of my own maintenance and ive never had any issues, with my 3500. BTW the new 68rfe trannys that Dodge has are a dream, especially with that engine break now.

In 2000 he bought a new Durango with the 360 and it was a beast. It actually towed his 18-wheeler (this is a gasoline engine mind you) I learned to drive in it and I absolutely loved it. One of these days i'm going to get one for myself. Now he has a massive 2500 with like, (i think) an 8 litre v-10. Its a tank and its badass.

No offense but i call bull shit, my friend has a 3500 and he towed an 18-wheeler, and he is pushing damm near 505HP at the rear wheels, and he struggled to get that sucker moving. But once he got out of 1st gear he was doing good, blew black smoke everywhere.



Oh a little tike. That's still not enough power for mountain climbing (especially the torque figure). The higher your power to weight ratio, the better off you'll be.



The heaviest Toyota hauler (7,200 lb GVWR):
http://www.toyota.com/tundra/

The heaviest Ford hauler (37,000 lb GVWR):
https://www.fleet.ford.com/showroom/2009fleetshowroom/2009-F750.asp


Need I say more?

Need i say that the Dodge 2500 and 3500 also use Cummins engines, the SAME engines that are offered in the F-650 and up???????


Obviously you need brake, transmission, and engine cooling but that's what gets you over the mountain, not gets you over it like it wasn't even there.


NO,. you need an engine break like the dodge trucks have:D


Duramax vs PowerStroke 6.4L? PowerStroke, more power and better suited to real work (trailers, heavy payloads).

No offense, but everyone agrees that Cummins kicks the shit out of Duramax and Powerstroke.

Nothing can beat the flat torque curve of a Cummins diesel.


F-150 vs 1500? F-150, much heavier chassis, more options, and very reliable.

F-250 vs 2500? Why? 1-ton chassis aren't much more expensive and they offer a lot more bang for the buck.


Its more like a F-350 equals a dodge 2500, dodge 3500=F-450+,


The Dodge 3500 is rated the same as the F-450, once you break GCWR of 24,000 then you break into the Dodge 4500 series. Of course, while towing an 18,500lbs trailer our 2008 Dodge 3500 clocked a consistent 15mpg, something that my buddies F-450 couldn't touch with a 50 foot pole. He was clocking 8 on a good side while traveling through the Carolina, the same stretch we broke 16.1mpg. :)

Of course my older 99 3500 clocks a consistent 17 empty, and 15 under tow. Believe it or not but my truck has a GCWR of 18,000LBs with a max trailer tow weight of 12,500lbs

[Wile E]

No, even the well maintained Dodges were in the shop more than both Ford or Chevy. Especially anything with a 5.2L V8.

And Dodge overrates their towing ability. Yeah, it will do what they say, but it will kill your truck in the process. The non-6.0 Powerstrokes will do the same as the Dodges in their class, as will the Duramaxes, they're just not rated as such, as they prefer to err on the side of caution.

If you are talking about chassis limits, dodge cheats in that category as well. Look how much bigger a Dodge 2500 is than the other 2.

As far as engine brakes, it's a simple valve in the exhaust system. You can get an aftermarket one for dirt cheap for the other 2.

Sorry, but Dodge makes the lowest quality product, good engine or not.

[pepsi71ocean]

No, even the well maintained Dodges were in the shop more than both Ford or Chevy. Especially anything with a 5.2L V8.


The gassers i don't know jack shit about, however the A518(46re) transmission they used had some crappy hardware in them.

The A618's are a big improvement over the 518's, but its still has its its issues, mainly then weak POS single disk tq converter. That is the crux on the dodge trucks back in the 2nd gen.

But you must remember that back then all diesel tract trailers had manual's, and that was because automatics were never designed to handle the torque of the big inline diesel engines. For still had issues when they moved from the C-6 to the E40D and to the 4R100 transmissions, and i know plenty of ford fans who will admit that their 2nd gen equivalent of the Dodge have their own serious issues as well.

Ive never heard of the Manual dodge ram's being in the shop excessively, and from my knowledge the NV 4500 and 5600's transmissions are well sought after for their durability, and upgrade-ability from back in the production days.


And Dodge overrates their towing ability. Yeah, it will do what they say, but it will kill your truck in the process. The non-6.0 Powerstrokes will do the same as the Dodges in their class, as will the Duramaxes, they're just not rated as such, as they prefer to err on the side of caution.


That is because the duramax and the powerstroke can't handle the load stress associated with towing that kind of weight.

Dodge fixed alot of issues after the second gen's.

dodge doesn't over rate their towing ability, we have put alot of miles on the 08 3500 towing 18,500lbs and no issues. I know guys who have towed 20,000 lbs and have 100,000 miles on their 2008 dodges who have no issues.

The new 6.7 with the 68 rfe is a great combination, especially the new engine break reconfiguration that Cummins put in.


If you are talking about chassis limits, dodge cheats in that category as well. Look how much bigger a Dodge 2500 is than the other 2.


im not comparing the 1500's or the gas rams, i deal with the diesel equivalents.

look how much bigger a dodge 2500's rear axle is, or how much bigger the 3500's axle is. the Dana 80's were bigger then the dana 70's that were on the 2500.

The rear axle on my 3500 was bigger then the ford equivalent that i drove at work. mind the fact that i towed with that ford for the longest time, till i started towing for him with my truck. 10,000lbs in a dodge 3500 and i did alot better then the shitty ford that i had before hand to tow with.

As an example, look at the F-450 engine configuration from any year, and compare it to that of the dodge, the ford 7.3PS with the 4R100 transmission, and then the steel drive shaft, and then last but not least the rear axle.

The Ford F-450 had a GCRW of 15,000lbs the same that the Dodge 3500 did, however the Dodge could handle that same 15,000lbs using a 3.55 rear while the ford had to use a 4.11.

The same dodge 3500 equipped with a 4.10 rear had a GCWR of 18,000lbs(when equipped with a manual transmission NV 5600 and the 4.10 rear)

So if your thinking that dodge overrates its trucks because it can handle the same load with lower rears, then your no comparing apples with apples, fact is that the PS 7.3 couldn't keep up with a Cummins 5.9.

Remember that back in 1999 that the 7.3PS was still gen 1, switching to gen 2. the Cummins put out less HP and TQ then then PS did, however the Cummins had a fat torque curve from 1,400-2,700RPM, while the for PS torque peak was about 1,600. it wasn't until 2005 that the PS got a lot flatter torque curve, then it had previously.

But, that is why Cummins got better mileages then the PS and DM's. I can accelerate a 12,000 lbs boat at 1,500 or at 2,100 rpm and accelerate at the same speed because i have a flat torque curve, infact the ford F-450 i used at work needed to be floored for me to get that truck to move with the 10,000 lb kubota tractor and the heavy trailer associated with it.


As far as engine brakes, it's a simple valve in the exhaust system. You can get an aftermarket one for dirt cheap for the other 2.

Cummmins doesn't use valve retarders, they use the turbo brake system, it is more effective at low rpm then the valve retarder, and its also not considered an "compression break" so you can leave it on 24/7, and you don't fall under the compression break laws, that is the most important of them all.


Sorry, but Dodge makes the lowest quality product, good engine or not.

lowest quality or not, i get mileages while driving or even towing that fords and chevy's can't touch, and ive never scene a ford f450 get the same mileage that i get, and ive hit alot of truck stops.

Fact is, more guys are moving towards the 2008 doge 3500's then the ford or chevy equivalents, ive scene alot more dodge guys on the road who tow their commercial car haulers.

from a different generation you would be right, but they have fixed alot of issues, one that existed before, the new 68rfe is all heavy duty clutchpacks, its a vast improvement over the older clutchpack and kickdown band system like in the old A518-A818 series of transmissions, there was nothing wrong with the clutch pack and kickdown band, but the drappy tc.

HOWEVER for all the improvements the early 3rd gen's had, they A818's(48re) were even shitter then the A618's(aka 47re), The 48's had improvements to the transmission but they were insignificant to handle the increased torque and HP that the cummins engines were putting out, aks 300 and later 325hp. in that respect you are correct because of the 48re transmission's issues i couldn't ever own a 3rd gen, however the later 3rd gen's that used the 68rfe transmission's are wonderful. they will handle alot more out of a tuned up motor then the older transmissions. an their torque converter has been upgraded to something comparable from before.

but you MUST admit that neither ford or chevy are 2010 emissions compliant. dodge went through that issues back in 2007 when they decided to beat the 50 state, and federal 2010 emissions standards. I am afraid to think on what will happen when ford and chevy bring out their 2010 compliant engines.

Yes the 2007.5 dodges had alot of issues, and those issues were gone withing a year, there are some issues still with the new EGR's systems something that we back in the pre-emisison days never had to deal with, however ive found while towing with my dad's 2008 3500 that if you keep the engine brake on when you drive, unless your towing a heavy load greater then 8,000lbs (then you don't need it) you don't have any issues, because the engine is under load and throwing out 1,000 degrees out of that exhaust, and its making sure the EGR stays clean. With over 20,000 miles on the 2008 Dodge 3500 towing nothing but a 18,500 lb 5th wheel trailer, this truck has held up very well, and i'll admit that when my truck had to tow that 5th wheeler to our house (before we bought the new 2008) my truck had issues, and my dad drove it home and literally he said that the camper manhandled the truck, but i don't know because i wasn't in the truck when he towed it home. Then again the truck was towing way out of its intended range, the truck wasn't set up for that, not with a automatic tranny and 3.55's in the pumpkins.


The problems dodge trucks have now is that the EGR's back up and cause alarms and issues, however keeping the jake on or forcing the engine to work harder in the case of towing heavier loads, or running lower gears ie 4.10's in the pumpkins resolves this issue.

[Steevo]

It can climb mountains when it's not hauling a tow car. Add a 4000lbs Blazer on the back of it and it really can't climb. Plus the carb never runs right in the high altitude. The thing that's a real nightmare in Colorado is the bicyclers. I fucking hate em, they have ZERO respect for the people on the road. You would think they would have the common sense to get out of the way when a 4 ton motor home is going DOWNHILL behind them.

Rules of the road state they have right of way, try messing with one of them and you will find yourself in deep shit. Samething in Boulder, all the bike paths/walkways, One guy I personally saw get a ticket for intruding into the walkway that crossed a road and yelling at a couple of rollerbladers since he coudn't turn.

I loved the girls in Boulder, college girls that just want to have fun, and lots of fun to be had.


http://inlinediesel.com/deathmatch/


I know this is a review showing how bad the Chevy, does, however if you look around the internet at people who dyno, two and race, the Chevy wins. However you should really enjoy the article, I know I did, it shows the true colors of the dodge owner.

[FordGT90Concept]

Need i say that the Dodge 2500 and 3500 also use Cummins engines, the SAME engines that are offered in the F-650 and up???????
Cummins is the smallest engine Ford offers on those platforms. The beastly engine is the Caterpillar 7.2L (http://ohe.cat.com/cda/layout?m=85520&x=7) (300 hp, >800 ft lbs).


No offense, but everyone agrees that Cummins kicks the shit out of Duramax and Powerstroke.

Nothing can beat the flat torque curve of a Cummins diesel.
The engine might be superior but it is only as good as the truck it is sitting in.


Its more like a F-350 equals a dodge 2500, dodge 3500=F-450+,
All figures 2008 unless noted.

F-250 (9,200 (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/auto-parts/towing/towing-capacity/vehicle/gvwr10.htm)) ~= 2500 (8,800 (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/auto-parts/towing/towing-capacity/vehicle/gvwr9.htm))
F-350 (10,100 (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/auto-parts/towing/towing-capacity/vehicle/gvwr10.htm)) ~= 3500 (11,000 (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/auto-parts/towing/towing-capacity/vehicle/gvwr9.htm))
F-450 (14,500 (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/auto-parts/towing/towing-capacity/vehicle/gvwr10.htm)) ~= 4500 (16,500 (http://www.allpar.com/trucks/chassis-cab.html) 2009)

I should also note that there is no standard for measuring GVWR--SAE is working on creating a standard now.

[Wile E]

The gassers i don't know jack shit about, however the A518(46re) transmission they used had some crappy hardware in them.

The A618's are a big improvement over the 518's, but its still has its its issues, mainly then weak POS single disk tq converter. That is the crux on the dodge trucks back in the 2nd gen.

But you must remember that back then all diesel tract trailers had manual's, and that was because automatics were never designed to handle the torque of the big inline diesel engines. For still had issues when they moved from the C-6 to the E40D and to the 4R100 transmissions, and i know plenty of ford fans who will admit that their 2nd gen equivalent of the Dodge have their own serious issues as well.

Ive never heard of the Manual dodge ram's being in the shop excessively, and from my knowledge the NV 4500 and 5600's transmissions are well sought after for their durability, and upgrade-ability from back in the production days.



That is because the duramax and the powerstroke can't handle the load stress associated with towing that kind of weight.

Dodge fixed alot of issues after the second gen's.

dodge doesn't over rate their towing ability, we have put alot of miles on the 08 3500 towing 18,500lbs and no issues. I know guys who have towed 20,000 lbs and have 100,000 miles on their 2008 dodges who have no issues.

The new 6.7 with the 68 rfe is a great combination, especially the new engine break reconfiguration that Cummins put in.



im not comparing the 1500's or the gas rams, i deal with the diesel equivalents.

look how much bigger a dodge 2500's rear axle is, or how much bigger the 3500's axle is. the Dana 80's were bigger then the dana 70's that were on the 2500.

The rear axle on my 3500 was bigger then the ford equivalent that i drove at work. mind the fact that i towed with that ford for the longest time, till i started towing for him with my truck. 10,000lbs in a dodge 3500 and i did alot better then the shitty ford that i had before hand to tow with.

As an example, look at the F-450 engine configuration from any year, and compare it to that of the dodge, the ford 7.3PS with the 4R100 transmission, and then the steel drive shaft, and then last but not least the rear axle.

The Ford F-450 had a GCRW of 15,000lbs the same that the Dodge 3500 did, however the Dodge could handle that same 15,000lbs using a 3.55 rear while the ford had to use a 4.11.

The same dodge 3500 equipped with a 4.10 rear had a GCWR of 18,000lbs(when equipped with a manual transmission NV 5600 and the 4.10 rear)

So if your thinking that dodge overrates its trucks because it can handle the same load with lower rears, then your no comparing apples with apples, fact is that the PS 7.3 couldn't keep up with a Cummins 5.9.

Remember that back in 1999 that the 7.3PS was still gen 1, switching to gen 2. the Cummins put out less HP and TQ then then PS did, however the Cummins had a fat torque curve from 1,400-2,700RPM, while the for PS torque peak was about 1,600. it wasn't until 2005 that the PS got a lot flatter torque curve, then it had previously.

But, that is why Cummins got better mileages then the PS and DM's. I can accelerate a 12,000 lbs boat at 1,500 or at 2,100 rpm and accelerate at the same speed because i have a flat torque curve, infact the ford F-450 i used at work needed to be floored for me to get that truck to move with the 10,000 lb kubota tractor and the heavy trailer associated with it.


Cummmins doesn't use valve retarders, they use the turbo brake system, it is more effective at low rpm then the valve retarder, and its also not considered an "compression break" so you can leave it on 24/7, and you don't fall under the compression break laws, that is the most important of them all.



lowest quality or not, i get mileages while driving or even towing that fords and chevy's can't touch, and ive never scene a ford f450 get the same mileage that i get, and ive hit alot of truck stops.

Fact is, more guys are moving towards the 2008 doge 3500's then the ford or chevy equivalents, ive scene alot more dodge guys on the road who tow their commercial car haulers.

from a different generation you would be right, but they have fixed alot of issues, one that existed before, the new 68rfe is all heavy duty clutchpacks, its a vast improvement over the older clutchpack and kickdown band system like in the old A518-A818 series of transmissions, there was nothing wrong with the clutch pack and kickdown band, but the drappy tc.

HOWEVER for all the improvements the early 3rd gen's had, they A818's(48re) were even shitter then the A618's(aka 47re), The 48's had improvements to the transmission but they were insignificant to handle the increased torque and HP that the cummins engines were putting out, aks 300 and later 325hp. in that respect you are correct because of the 48re transmission's issues i couldn't ever own a 3rd gen, however the later 3rd gen's that used the 68rfe transmission's are wonderful. they will handle alot more out of a tuned up motor then the older transmissions. an their torque converter has been upgraded to something comparable from before.

but you MUST admit that neither ford or chevy are 2010 emissions compliant. dodge went through that issues back in 2007 when they decided to beat the 50 state, and federal 2010 emissions standards. I am afraid to think on what will happen when ford and chevy bring out their 2010 compliant engines.

Yes the 2007.5 dodges had alot of issues, and those issues were gone withing a year, there are some issues still with the new EGR's systems something that we back in the pre-emisison days never had to deal with, however ive found while towing with my dad's 2008 3500 that if you keep the engine brake on when you drive, unless your towing a heavy load greater then 8,000lbs (then you don't need it) you don't have any issues, because the engine is under load and throwing out 1,000 degrees out of that exhaust, and its making sure the EGR stays clean. With over 20,000 miles on the 2008 Dodge 3500 towing nothing but a 18,500 lb 5th wheel trailer, this truck has held up very well, and i'll admit that when my truck had to tow that 5th wheeler to our house (before we bought the new 2008) my truck had issues, and my dad drove it home and literally he said that the camper manhandled the truck, but i don't know because i wasn't in the truck when he towed it home. Then again the truck was towing way out of its intended range, the truck wasn't set up for that, not with a automatic tranny and 3.55's in the pumpkins.


The problems dodge trucks have now is that the EGR's back up and cause alarms and issues, however keeping the jake on or forcing the engine to work harder in the case of towing heavier loads, or running lower gears ie 4.10's in the pumpkins resolves this issue.

Just as I know plenty of people towing those kind of loads on F350's. And gearing difference don't mean jack shit. All that matters is the gearing is optimized for your intended use and configuration. If the engine revs higher, it needs steeper gears. Doesn't matter as long as it gets the job done. It doesn't make a particular design better or worse than another. It just makes it so the different setups have different strengths.

And notice how everything that's actually worthwhile on a diesel powered Dodge isn't actually designed by them? Makes one wonder, doesn't it?

While they may use a good engine in their diesels , it doesn't change the fact that Dodge is the worst brand of truck in terms of reliability. You need to remember that gas powered trucks far outsell diesel powered.

[JC316]

Rules of the road state they have right of way, try messing with one of them and you will find yourself in deep shit. Samething in Boulder, all the bike paths/walkways, One guy I personally saw get a ticket for intruding into the walkway that crossed a road and yelling at a couple of rollerbladers since he coudn't turn.

I loved the girls in Boulder, college girls that just want to have fun, and lots of fun to be had.


http://inlinediesel.com/deathmatch/


I know this is a review showing how bad the Chevy, does, however if you look around the internet at people who dyno, two and race, the Chevy wins. However you should really enjoy the article, I know I did, it shows the true colors of the dodge owner.

That sucks ass. Here in Texas they have the same rights as other drivers, but they don't automatically get the right of way. I just think they need to get a brain. The rules may be clear, but when a runaway truck smashes you, you are still dead. Where are your rules then?

[Steevo]

here the law reads you must stop for pedestrains (everyone on a non-motorized vehicle too) in the crosswalk.

[FordGT90Concept]

The law doesn't protect stupid pedestrians though (e.g. the suicidal types). Still, the worst charge you can get is vehicular manslaughter assuming it was accidental.

[pepsi71ocean]

Cummins is the smallest engine Ford offers on those platforms. The beastly engine is the Caterpillar 7.2L (http://ohe.cat.com/cda/layout?m=85520&x=7) (300 hp, >800 ft lbs).

And as i said, F-550-F850 its an option.

Its a load of crap, it shows you how asinine that is, a Cummins 5.9L makes 325HP and 650lbs of torque, and yet the new 6.7L (emissions compliant) Cummins makes 350HP and 700lbs of torque.

The fact that Cat has to make their 7.2L engine to get the same HP and TQ just shows how good their fuel mileage is.

anyone remember the mileage on the 7.3?



All figures 2008 unless noted.

F-250 (9,200 (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/auto-parts/towing/towing-capacity/vehicle/gvwr10.htm)) ~= 2500 (8,800 (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/auto-parts/towing/towing-capacity/vehicle/gvwr9.htm))
F-350 (10,100 (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/auto-parts/towing/towing-capacity/vehicle/gvwr10.htm)) ~= 3500 (11,000 (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/auto-parts/towing/towing-capacity/vehicle/gvwr9.htm))
F-450 (14,500 (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/auto-parts/towing/towing-capacity/vehicle/gvwr10.htm)) ~= 4500 (16,500 (http://www.allpar.com/trucks/chassis-cab.html) 2009)


The problem with the list you give is that that doesn't compare apples to apples. The 2008 dodge 3500 that we own has the same GVWR at the F-450(24,000lbs). The reason is because it has been tuned out with a towing package, and better lief spring systems, suspension and brakes as well. our GVWR is 14,000, and the towing capacity is listed at 16,700, the GCWR is 24,000lbs. the SAME as the F-450.

You must account in factors such as dual or single rear axle, front and rear axle weight ratings, gearing, transmission and engine configuration.

ALso the website listed 11,000 lbs as the GVWR, which is ironic as it is the same weight rating from 1999, however the weight rating has increased significantly since 1999. The 2008 Dogde 3500 rating is 12,200 with the diesel and the 3.73 rear.

Another thing i would like to mention about that website is it lists the F-450's GCWR as 27,000lbs (another site listed a whopping 33,000lbs) which is way to high and illegal as well. the F-450's engine package is not qualified to pass for such a weight rating, neither is ford's frame work, its ironic how the Fords front axle rating is 6,000lbs and the dodge is 7,000lbs and yet the ford has a 27,000GCWR, while the dodge ram is 24,000.

the 3rd statement i wish to make is you can't tow over 10,000lbs from a hitch regardless of what the mfg says, it a Class 5 hitch the largest they make, so ford needs to learn to watch what they say, because this goes into that GVWR that you talked about. So your 5th wheel Combined weight can't exceed towing capacity when using the trucks braking system, however once the 5th wheel uses electronic braking, then the weight restriction of the truck is based on the 5th wheels ball weight.



I should also note that there is no standard for measuring GVWR--SAE is working on creating a standard now.

That is correct, that is why ford rates its truck higher then dodge does, infact i know several ford guys who have been withing the ford GCWR limits who have shitted 2 or 3 powerstrokes withing 200,000 miles.

One guy who has an F-450 blew his powerstoke motor 3 times withing 180,000 miles, and yet his car hauler never exceeded the towing weight of 16,000lbs(for which the F-450 is rated for, ironically the dodge Ram 3500 is rated 16,700, which is funny since his F-450 and our 3500 are set up almost identically, with the exception of his 4.88 dog rear, compared to our 4.10's)

Ford still hasn't fixed their issues, and they (like dodge had) will be plagued by the 2010 compliance issues, something dodge has powered through and is now perfected, while the ford and gm hasn't yet become compliant.



Just as I know plenty of people towing those kind of loads on F350's. And gearing difference don't mean jack shit. All that matters is the gearing is optimized for your intended use and configuration. If the engine revs higher, it needs steeper gears. Doesn't matter as long as it gets the job done. It doesn't make a particular design better or worse than another. It just makes it so the different setups have different strengths.


gearing is everything in a narrow power band like the Cummins engine. The cummins power band is very narrow when compared to that of both the powerstroke and the duramax. this makes gearing all that more important, also the larger the gearing the better the pulling power, any mechanic knows that in 101.


And notice how everything that's actually worthwhile on a diesel powered Dodge isn't actually designed by them? Makes one wonder, doesn't it?


And that is why people still go and get dodge trucks, dodge trucks are work horses, they will take what ever you give them and they will eat it alive.

As my one friend in the towing business says: You get a dodge because you want to know you can tow anything and everything, and know that you won't have any issues maxing out your rig, however you trade comfort, so if your after comfort then go get a ford.


While they may use a good engine in their diesels , it doesn't change the fact that Dodge is the worst brand of truck in terms of reliability. You need to remember that gas powered trucks far outsell diesel powered.

Ide like to quote from a review website listed above in GT90-'s list for the 2009 GVWR list,
A choice of two transmissions, both typically used in Class 6 trucks, is available: a six-speed Aisin automatic also used (with different packaging) in Kino-Toyota trucks, and a six-speed 656 manual (Chrysler shows this as being a Mercedes model, but we were told by an outsider that it is actually a standard Getrag unit). The Aisin transmission comes with a three year, 180,000 mile, zero-deductible warranty, showing the company’s confidence; it also has a tow-haul mode which works in both upshifting and downshifting, changing the shift schedule.

Incase you didn't know this is the 68rfe transmission that is in our 3500's, infact its standard on all Dodge diesel powered trucks, and UNLIKE the shitty allison transmissions that are stressed out in the Kodiak series this Aisin is capable of alot of stress under loads.

Another quote
The frame is Sterling (Freightliner) engineered and built. The Cummins "B" 6.7 liter engine (already in production, with cleaner emissions than the current 5.9 used by Dodge) provides motorvation. Styling is definitely Ram-based.

...he said they are built with custom frames at a Freightliner facility (the frames themselves are from Freightliner, the new M2 class).

Apparently dodge doesn't even make their own frames anymore, instead they are Freightliner designed, I did call DOdge about this and they said that Freightliner makes the frames.

Dodge is getting better, they are fixing issues that existed in past years, their 2008 ram's are some of the best on the market.


PLEASE tell me how dodge is stillt he shittest maker in the truck business, because freightliner frames, Aisin transmissions, and Cummins engines, how is this shitty?


I think your vision of Dodge is left over from the early Gen 3 days with the shitty 48re trannys. YEA the doors are rusting out on my Dodge, However i expect that, since my truck has scene alot of action near saltwater, and in some as well. SO the rust is expected, for a 10 year old truck that is still going strong i expect nothing less, since ive scene what a 1999 ford F-450 looks like and well, lets just say its in worse shape then my dodge is.

dodge has more diesel sales then gas powered towing rigs, actually dodge sells more diesel rigs in 2007 then it did gas powered engines, this is multifaceted, mostly because the Cummins powered trucks can achieve 20mpg on a regular basis, while the gas and ford and chevy equivalents can't match that.


i didn't buy a dodge, i bought a Cummins with a dodge wrapped around it.


Ford's Powerstoke is a shitty engine as well, you can't go around dissing dodge, because we all know how "reliable/durable" the fuel system is on the powerstroke engine.

[JC316]

here the law reads you must stop for pedestrains (everyone on a non-motorized vehicle too) in the crosswalk.

Oh yeah, in a crosswalk for sure. Here if you strike a pedestrian outside of a crosswalk, you aren't at fault since they were jaywalking. I am talking about the cyclers that are going down the fucking mountain roads and the highways. The ones that aren't in cities or any other place where there are bike paths.

[Wile E]

gearing is everything in a narrow power band like the Cummins engine. The cummins power band is very narrow when compared to that of both the powerstroke and the duramax. this makes gearing all that more important, also the larger the gearing the better the pulling power, any mechanic knows that in 101.You completely missed the angle of the argument I was presenting. Let me try to word it better. Using gearing as a matter of comparison on 2 different platforms is pointless. The only thing that needs to be known is whether or not the vehicle is geared properly for your particular needs, the engine's power band, and the transmission ratios. Saying Ford has 4.11's while Dodge has 3.55's is meaningless. It's comparing apples to oranges. But while we are on the topic, a narrow power band requires longer gears, or more OD in the transmission to make it useful. Steeper gears will give you more off the line, but you'll pay for it dearly on the highway. This has nothing to do with how the 2 platforms compare.


And that is why people still go and get dodge trucks, dodge trucks are work horses, they will take what ever you give them and they will eat it alive.

As my one friend in the towing business says: You get a dodge because you want to know you can tow anything and everything, and know that you won't have any issues maxing out your rig, however you trade comfort, so if your after comfort then go get a ford.



Ide like to quote from a review website listed above in GT90-'s list for the 2009 GVWR list,


Incase you didn't know this is the 68rfe transmission that is in our 3500's, infact its standard on all Dodge diesel powered trucks, and UNLIKE the shitty allison transmissions that are stressed out in the Kodiak series this Aisin is capable of alot of stress under loads.

Another quote


Apparently dodge doesn't even make their own frames anymore, instead they are Freightliner designed, I did call DOdge about this and they said that Freightliner makes the frames.

Dodge is getting better, they are fixing issues that existed in past years, their 2008 ram's are some of the best on the market.


PLEASE tell me how dodge is stillt he shittest maker in the truck business, because freightliner frames, Aisin transmissions, and Cummins engines, how is this shitty?


I think your vision of Dodge is left over from the early Gen 3 days with the shitty 48re trannys. YEA the doors are rusting out on my Dodge, However i expect that, since my truck has scene alot of action near saltwater, and in some as well. SO the rust is expected, for a 10 year old truck that is still going strong i expect nothing less, since ive scene what a 1999 ford F-450 looks like and well, lets just say its in worse shape then my dodge is.

dodge has more diesel sales then gas powered towing rigs, actually dodge sells more diesel rigs in 2007 then it did gas powered engines, this is multifaceted, mostly because the Cummins powered trucks can achieve 20mpg on a regular basis, while the gas and ford and chevy equivalents can't match that.


i didn't buy a dodge, i bought a Cummins with a dodge wrapped around it.


Ford's Powerstoke is a shitty engine as well, you can't go around dissing dodge, because we all know how "reliable/durable" the fuel system is on the powerstroke engine.
Again, they sell more gas powered trucks than diesel. Not once was it mentioned in this thread that we were specifically talking about towing or commercial rigs. I think you'll find that you are the one that tried to sway the thread in that direction. Their one good product does not redeem their entire lineup. The rest of their lineup is shit.

As to Sterling building their frames, that just further reinforces my opinion that Dodge can't do anything right on their own.

Now on to rust, I have seen a shitload more Dodges rusting to death around here than either Ford or Chevy. Even their paint is sub-standard. (well, it's mostly the primer that's shitty, actually) Any vehicle will rust to hell and back if you don't wash off the salt tho. There's no stopping it. I don't have salt water, but I have salted roads in the winter. The cold prevents you from washing it off most of the time, so I know ALL about rust. They don't call this part of the country the Rust Belt for no reason. Some vehicles show fairly heavy rust after only 2 or 3 years.

And yes, the 6.0 Powerstroke is a POS, but not the others. Yes, some had fuel problems, just like Duramax had a cooling problem, just like the Cummins had a head gasket problem at one point in time. So, what was your point again? All of them had problems, and nobody denies that. It STILL doesn't make Dodge a good manufacturer.

[FordGT90Concept]

And as i said, F-550-F850 its an option.

Its a load of crap, it shows you how asinine that is, a Cummins 5.9L makes 325HP and 650lbs of torque, and yet the new 6.7L (emissions compliant) Cummins makes 350HP and 700lbs of torque.

The fact that Cat has to make their 7.2L engine to get the same HP and TQ just shows how good their fuel mileage is.

anyone remember the mileage on the 7.3?
Truck Trend wrote about that some time ago. The new emissions standards are requiring more reburning of fuel which leads to hotter components and in turn, a more robust cooling system. You have to burn more fuel to get the same power at lower emissions which ends up being more emissions because you burnt more fuel to begin with. Whenever government gets involved in industry, "sense" goes out the window. :(

The Cat makes a 200+ more torque. When you're pulling (and you wouldn't have that heavy of a chassis if you weren't), torque is all that really matters.


The problem with the list you give is that that doesn't compare apples to apples. The 2008 dodge 3500 that we own has the same GVWR at the F-450(24,000lbs). The reason is because it has been tuned out with a towing package, and better lief spring systems, suspension and brakes as well. our GVWR is 14,000, and the towing capacity is listed at 16,700, the GCWR is 24,000lbs. the SAME as the F-450.
Put the same springs on the F-350 and you get similar figures. The point being, the numbers, like graphics card and processor model numbers, are used by manfacturers to show approximate equivilents in chassis strength. It's more of a marketing thing than real science, at least until it is standardized.



One guy who has an F-450 blew his powerstoke motor 3 times withing 180,000 miles, and yet his car hauler never exceeded the towing weight of 16,000lbs(for which the F-450 is rated for, ironically the dodge Ram 3500 is rated 16,700, which is funny since his F-450 and our 3500 are set up almost identically, with the exception of his 4.88 dog rear, compared to our 4.10's)
Again, is that Power Stroke a 6.0L? Those engines were an epic fail no matter what load was on them. They were over complicated, underbuilt, and undertested before going into production. The 7.3L, despite having poor fuel economy, was a very reliable and durable work horse serving for over a decade. The 6.4L basically fixes the problems in the 6.0L. The 6.7L is shaping up to be a real competitor in terms of power and reliability. It probably still won't match Cummins I-6 in fuel economy but, it will sell well because it comes in a Ford package.

Regardless, Dodge barely exists anymore and really had no commercial success besides the Caravan back in the 1990s. Dodge has always placed third in the truck market behind Ford and Chevrolet (respectively).

[pepsi71ocean]

Truck Trend wrote about that some time ago. The new emissions standards are requiring more reburning of fuel which leads to hotter components and in turn, a more robust cooling system. You have to burn more fuel to get the same power at lower emissions which ends up being more emissions because you burnt more fuel to begin with. Whenever government gets involved in industry, "sense" goes out the window. :(


Yea i'lla gree with that, that is why ims ticking with my 2nd gen 3500, i get 18-20mpg empty, and i don't miss it, the newer 3500's are lower, more like 16-17, which begs the question about how the PS and DM will handle the 2010 compliance issues,

I mean the Powerstroke and DM get 7-9mpg now, what will they get post 2010 compliance, 6-8?


The Cat makes a 200+ more torque. When you're pulling (and you wouldn't have that heavy of a chassis if you weren't), torque is all that really matters.


Torque is only needed for acceleration, once the load is moving you need HP to keep it going. this is why the Cummins is the best of both worlds.

In reality that is the only difference, but i must add that the torque could be changed on the Cummins, our OSB's in our 54 Meridian are 380HP, yet are 770LBS of tq, that is coming from a 5.9L Cummins. What im saying is unless someone can find a HP and TQ listing for the Ford F-750's Cummins output then its hard to tell if they tweeked the torque output or not.

Unlike the 5.9L rams the 6.7ls have a higher torque rating for the automatics of 650lbs while the manuals have been degraded to 610lbs. So what im saying is that they could have bumped it for the ford, because i KNOW that the F-750 with an allison 2500 tranmission has a 4.78 rear in it.


Again, is that Power Stroke a 6.0L? Those engines were an epic fail no matter what load was on them. They were over complicated, underbuilt, and undertested before going into production. The 7.3L, despite having poor fuel economy, was a very reliable and durable work horse serving for over a decade. The 6.4L basically fixes the problems in the 6.0L. The 6.7L is shaping up to be a real competitor in terms of power and reliability. It probably still won't match Cummins I-6 in fuel economy but, it will sell well because it comes in a Ford package.


The first one was a 6.0L, then the second powerhead was a 6.4L (ford changed the motor(well upgraded it), and the third one was a 6.4L as well.

Were working on putting a Cummins 5.9L in his truck as we speak.

Ford gave him the run around with the 3rd powerhead, so after oh about 3 years of convincing we finally got him to convert to a 5.9L Cummins, which now he has a bastardized truck because its no long a ford...


Regardless, Dodge barely exists anymore and really had no commercial success besides the Caravan back in the 1990s. Dodge has always placed third in the truck market behind Ford and Chevrolet (respectively).

Dodge is making a comeback. they have done well, but unfortunately people won't let their mistakes from the past go. and until more dodges get on the road it will stay that way.

I bought a dodge for one reason, Cummins durability. Having friends who own both fords and chevys, and knowing guys who tow with both ford and chevys, ive saved alot of ass over the years with my truck.

So while lemon vehicles exist, this dodge is still going strong 10 years later.

http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/4889/65311109039654925982154.jpg

(6,600Lbs in truck bed, and this puppy is finally sitting level.)

[FordGT90Concept]

I mean the Powerstroke and DM get 7-9mpg now, what will they get post 2010 compliance, 6-8?
That's a stretch. I know the 6.4L averages anywhere from >10 to <20. Factory is closer to the 10 figure and tuned are closer to the 20 figure.



Torque is only needed for acceleration, once the load is moving you need HP to keep it going. this is why the Cummins is the best of both worlds.
Torque is the rotational force of the engine. Horsepower is drived from torque: hp = (torque * RPM) / 5252

Simply put, that 200+ extra torque will get you up the hill with ~33% more weight on it at the same gear ratios. Even the upper end semitractors only have some 500 hp but their torque is often in the thousands.


What im saying is unless someone can find a HP and TQ listing for the Ford F-750's Cummins output then its hard to tell if they tweeked the torque output or not.
This lists torque, horsepower, and RPMs for the 6.9 Cummins, 6.0 PowerStroke, and 7.2 Cat:
http://www.meadowlandford.com/ford-f650-f750-engine-specs.htm


Unlike the 5.9L rams the 6.7ls have a higher torque rating for the automatics of 650lbs while the manuals have been degraded to 610lbs. So what im saying is that they could have bumped it for the ford, because i KNOW that the F-750 with an allison 2500 tranmission has a 4.78 rear in it.
It's a commercial chassis. Which ratio they use is determined by what they intend to do with it. This site (http://www.truckpaper.com/listings/list.aspx?ETID=1&catid=27&Manu=FORD&Mdltxt=F750&mdlx=exact&bcatid=27) lists 4.11, 4.88, 5.13, and 5.57 ratios.


Note that Ford's heavy trucks were sold under the Sterling trucks brand since 1997 (at some point, Daimler aquired it from Ford and is now closing the brand down). The largest engine they offered is the Caterpiller C-15 (http://ohe.cat.com/cda/layout?m=85523&x=7): 15.2 L, rpm, 625 @ 2100 rpm, 2050 lb-ft @ 1200 rpm

[pepsi71ocean]

That's a stretch. I know the 6.4L averages anywhere from >10 to <20. Factory is closer to the 10 figure and tuned are closer to the 20 figure.


That isn't a stretch, the F-450 i drove at work clocked a reliable 8mpg. My buddies F-450(when it worked) got about 8.8-9.3, and the 9.+ Mpg was usually achieved empty and going with a stiff wind. My neighbors F-350 got about 9mpg.

My ex-gf's dad drove a concrete trailer with a Chevy 3500 with the 6.6 Duramax in it, he got 9-10mpg empty, and about the same towing it. The chevy 5500's we used at work got about 8-9 depending on what you were towing, or even empty the mileage never quite improved. My towing buddy gets about 8mpg with his Kodiak topkick, and well that has been a lemon vehicle, he is on his 3rd transmission, 3rd set of injectors, 4th set of glow plugs, all withing 500,000 miles.

Now the Kodiak Top Kick comes with an option for a Cummins as well, which he knows a top kick guy who has a Cummins, and has never had a problem with top kick.

my neighbor up the street has an old dodge 3500 that has a 12v, he uses that truck to deliver firewood. he routinely clock 20-22mpg while driving, me with my 24v on the other hand not so hot, 17-19 at best. Our new 08 3500 gets about 16-18mpg, and it never changes under load.


Torque is the rotational force of the engine. Horsepower is drived from torque: hp = (torque * RPM) / 5252


This is only true with Gasoline powered cars, Diesel vehicles the torque is roughly 220ftlbs per 100 horsepower.

However in the state of technology we can often modify the torque using chips and different injector pumps, and injector nozzles.



Simply put, that 200+ extra torque will get you up the hill with ~33% more weight on it at the same gear ratios. Even the upper end semitractors only have some 500 hp but their torque is often in the thousands.


The reason is because Diesel engines don't achieve the horsepower that they can get via RPM. This is because they are governed to low RPM operation, typically below 2,300RPm for larger motors, and 3,200 for smaller displacements. Diesels have different torque ratings based on several factors, the simplest begin the comparison of stroke and connecting rod length, compression i can go on about this. The longer the rod the higher the piston speed, the more force applied eitic.

The typical torque ratings between Cummins, Cat, Detroit and MAN are usually between 1,500-2,600lbs of torque, while HP ranges from 350-525.

Remember that in the early days Cummins powered Semi's were perfected over the competition because they could power through the Rockies with that 350HP, something that the other mfg's couldn't match in the 1960's.



This lists torque, horsepower, and RPMs for the 6.9 Cummins, 6.0 PowerStroke, and 7.2 Cat:
http://www.meadowlandford.com/ford-f650-f750-engine-specs.htm


That is because Cummins usually have high performance torque converters, to help convert the torque to HP.

yes, but as you can see HP and TQ are not related with diesel engines, especially with inline in which the torque curves are relatively flat, or non existent.

The 6.0's sucked, the head studs had a tendency to stretch themselves causing massive failures.


It's a commercial chassis. Which ratio they use is determined by what they intend to do with it. This site (http://www.truckpaper.com/listings/list.aspx?ETID=1&catid=27&Manu=FORD&Mdltxt=F750&mdlx=exact&bcatid=27) lists 4.11, 4.88, 5.13, and 5.57 ratios.


You are correct, however even with higher gear numbers, (a.k.a. 16, 18, 20 speeds), and coupled with higher rears equals decreased mileage. But as for torque multiplication, that is a different story.

Why do you think semi's get about 1.5MPG??


Note that Ford's heavy trucks were sold under the Sterling trucks brand since 1997 (at some point, Daimler aquired it from Ford and is now closing the brand down). The largest engine they offered is the Caterpiller C-15 (http://ohe.cat.com/cda/layout?m=85523&x=7): 15.2 L, rpm, 625 @ 2100 rpm, 2050 lb-ft @ 1200 rpm
[/quote]

I am familiar with the Cat-C-15, they are often found in sport fishing boats, usually they are tuned to about 800HP, and about 1,800lbs of torque.

[FordGT90Concept]

That isn't a stretch, the F-450 i drove at work clocked a reliable 8mpg. My buddies F-450(when it worked) got about 8.8-9.3, and the 9.+ Mpg was usually achieved empty and going with a stiff wind. My neighbors F-350 got about 9mpg.

My ex-gf's dad drove a concrete trailer with a Chevy 3500 with the 6.6 Duramax in it, he got 9-10mpg empty, and about the same towing it. The chevy 5500's we used at work got about 8-9 depending on what you were towing, or even empty the mileage never quite improved. My towing buddy gets about 8mpg with his Kodiak topkick, and well that has been a lemon vehicle, he is on his 3rd transmission, 3rd set of injectors, 4th set of glow plugs, all withing 500,000 miles.

Now the Kodiak Top Kick comes with an option for a Cummins as well, which he knows a top kick guy who has a Cummins, and has never had a problem with top kick.

my neighbor up the street has an old dodge 3500 that has a 12v, he uses that truck to deliver firewood. he routinely clock 20-22mpg while driving, me with my 24v on the other hand not so hot, 17-19 at best. Our new 08 3500 gets about 16-18mpg, and it never changes under load.
I wish I could find my Truck Trend that had the head to head... It doesn't really matter though, the F-350 still won. As Wile said, Cummins may make a great engine and Allison may make a great transmission but Dodge doesn't make a great truck.


Edit: I believe this is the article:
Part One (http://www.trucktrend.com/features/consumer/163_0712_power_pullers_part_one/index.html)
Part Two (http://www.trucktrend.com/roadtests/performance/163_0802_power_pullers_part_two/index.html)
Part Three (http://www.trucktrend.com/roadtests/performance/163_0802_power_pullers_part_three/index.html)
Wrap Up (http://www.trucktrend.com/roadtests/performance/163_0802_power_pullers_part_three/wrap_up.html)

Out of the three-quarter-ton trucks we'd go with the Ford F-250 V10 Triton. It may not be the quickest performer on the flats but if you need a solid, proven powertrain that can pull hard in the hills with diesel-like performance, this is the truck for you.

We think the one-tons are an easier decision. We'd park the Chevrolet Silverado 3500 and its Duramax in our driveway tomorrow and not give it a second thought. For our reasons why, just read the results below and our assessments from each test.
Note that Dodge wasn't even mentioned except in a comment about new trucks to compete with the F-450.

This is only true with Gasoline powered cars, Diesel vehicles the torque is roughly 220ftlbs per 100 horsepower.

However in the state of technology we can often modify the torque using chips and different injector pumps, and injector nozzles.
Funny, that Cat C-15 has over 440 ft lbs per 100 horsepower. Why? Because it is at half the RPM of medium duty diesel engine.


The typical torque ratings between Cummins, Cat, Detroit and MAN are usually between 1,500-2,600lbs of torque, while HP ranges from 350-525.
Only for 6-7L at 2000-3000 RPM. Lower the RPM and you get a lot more torque for your horsepower.


yes, but as you can see HP and TQ are not related with diesel engines, especially with inline in which the torque curves are relatively flat, or non existent.
Locomotives use electric prime movers because the torque is constant from 1 RPM to 10,000 RPM. All internal combustion engines have a torque curve.


You are correct, however even with higher gear numbers, (a.k.a. 16, 18, 20 speeds), and coupled with higher rears equals decreased mileage. But as for torque multiplication, that is a different story.

Why do you think semi's get about 1.5MPG??
F-750 has 5-, 6-, or 7-speed manual or 5- or 6- speed auto.

Because they haul 80,000 lbs of freight. The more power you are producing, the more fuel you're going to burn. Newer, more fuel efficient trucks can run around 3 mpg too, by the way.

[pepsi71ocean]

I wish I could find my Truck Trend that had the head to head... It doesn't really matter though, the F-350 still won. As Wile said, Cummins may make a great engine and Allison may make a great transmission but Dodge doesn't make a great truck.


Allison transmission suck, just as much as the old Dodge 518's. GM has used the light weight allison in their 1500-5500 series. Unfortunately its to light for the heavy duty work, and when ever i drover the 500 GM's i was afraid the tranny would break because it would have strange shift patterns.
Try and find parts for an allison upgrade? TRY to find a GM dealer who will work on a 4500 topkick.




Funny, that Cat C-15 has over 440 ft lbs per 100 horsepower. Why? Because it is at half the RPM of medium duty diesel engine.


NO your theory is wrong, its because the CRANK THROW IS LARGER! Remember i said there are many ways to tweak the torque output.You can change the torque put out by an engine based on the stroke, and the length of the connecting rods. An engine with longer connecting rods will have a lower max RPM however the longer the rod the harder the crank will turn and thus the more torque it makes.

The Stroke is directly related to the crank throw, two engine of equal stroke say4.25 inches for example, will have the same crank throw of 2.125". However if engine A has 4.5 inch connecting rods, and engine B has say 9" connecting rods, engine B will have a lower RPM however will produce more torque at all RPM's then Engine A. Engine A will produce max HP at say 6,500RPM because the shorter connecting rods lead to slower piston speeds which means less torque is achieved. Engine B with the 9 inch rods will apply torque to the crank shaft for a longer period of time, and will have a faster piston speed, however the crankshaft receives pressure from the rod for a longer amount of time then a shorter rod will.

Do you understand now?

HP is how fast the Crankshaft turns, TQ is how hard the pressure is turning the Crank.

Diesel by its self. Like i said, you can't begin to calculate the differences between a gas and diesel engine there are to many variables involved....


Lets look at a BOMBER run and look at all of the TORQUE RELATIONS

http://mopar.mopar1973man.com/personal/2002/dyno/dyno%20day.jpg

Alot were around the 100:200 break, some varied back and fourth, some exceed the 100:250 line.



Only for 6-7L at 2000-3000 RPM. Lower the RPM and you get a lot more torque for your horsepower.

Locomotives use electric prime movers because the torque is constant from 1 RPM to 10,000 RPM. All internal combustion engines have a torque curve.


You cant even compare a gas engine's power band to a diesels power band, not at all. A gas engine has a powerband that is much broader than a diesel and more often times produces more horse power than torque. If you were to compare a diesels dyno charts to a gas engines dyno charts they would vary so much because of powerband and rpm range. There are so many different variables to consider when you start comparing a gas to a diesel in hp and tq.

You know jack about diesels don't you...

So lets bring up a dyno chart.

2001-2004 Cummins 5.9L ISB Engine

http://dodgeram.org/tech/dsl/Facts/figures/2001_rating.jpg

http://dodgeram.org/tech/dsl/Facts/figures/2001_rating.jpg

holy shit a flat torque curve

Source: http://dodgeram.org/tech/dsl/Facts/01ISBspecs.html

1998-2001 Cummins 5.9L ISB Engine

http://dodgeram.org/tech/dsl/Facts/figures/auto-hp.gif

http://dodgeram.org/tech/dsl/Facts/figures/man-hp.gif


NOW, so you were saying something about torque curves not being flat? the torque curves are only as flat as the engine is efficient, Cummins engines are the most efficient of the 3, and as such they have a flat torque curve

You are comparing apples and oranges with turbo diesels and normally aspirated gas engines, the big difference being the turbocharger. Turbocharged gas engines have very flat HP and torque curves as well. One example of this would be VW's 2L direct injection turbo gasoline engine

HP: 200 @ 5100-6000 RPM
Torque: 207 lbft @ 1800-5100 RPM

Comparison 8.1L Big Block to Duramax

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y134/Burbman/BigBlockTQ.jpg

Funny how the Duramax has a FLAT TORQUE CURVE!


F-750 has 5-, 6-, or 7-speed manual or 5- or 6- speed auto.


That is why they all have 4+ rear ends. I never said that the F-750's use multi stage transmissions.


Because they haul 80,000 lbs of freight. The more power you are producing, the more fuel you're going to burn. Newer, more fuel efficient trucks can run around 3 mpg too, by the way.

And the More HP you produce the more fuel effective your engine becomes.

We all know what effect the rear has on the mpg of an engine, look at any gas pickup that has a 2.73 rear, and replace it with a 3.55 3.73 or 4.10, now watch your mileage go way down.

[pepsi71ocean]

I wish I could find my Truck Trend that had the head to head... It doesn't really matter though, the F-350 still won. As Wile said, Cummins may make a great engine and Allison may make a great transmission but Dodge doesn't make a great truck.


Edit: I believe this is the article:
Part One (http://www.trucktrend.com/features/consumer/163_0712_power_pullers_part_one/index.html)
Part Two (http://www.trucktrend.com/roadtests/performance/163_0802_power_pullers_part_two/index.html)
Part Three (http://www.trucktrend.com/roadtests/performance/163_0802_power_pullers_part_three/index.html)

Note that Dodge wasn't even mentioned except in a comment about new trucks to compete with the F-450.

All Dodge guys know that Motor trend is heavily supported by Ford. And as such Ford will always come out on top.

Yes, at the track my buddies F-450 kicks my trucks ass in the 1/4 mile, and so did my buddies 3500, but once you stuck 10,000lbs behind those trucks it was a different story.

Especially now since the new 6 speed auto's are here, now i haven't taken the new truck to the track( and i highly doubt that the old man would let me do that either), but i would suspect that the new dodge 6 speed will beat otu the both 5 speed ford and chevy alternatives.

i figured ide post the Horse power calculations for an engine

1/2 Displacement in cubic inches X RPM divided by 1728 = Engine Airflow in CFM.

CFM X VE = Actual Airflow in CFM

For stock 2 valve engines, use a VE of .8-.85 at torque peak and .7-.75 at power peak.

For stock 4 valve engines, use a VE of .9-.95 at torque peak and .85-.9 at power peak.

CFM divided by 1.5 = HP


So for example


1649/2=824.5

824.5 x 3,200(Note1)1728=1526.851

1526.851x.80(see Note2)=1221.481

1221.481/1.5=814.320

814.320HP at 3,200RPM

So then a Rolls Royce Merlin engine developed 814HP at WOT at sea level. If you attached a Supercharger you must increase the VE, to acquire more HP. (the stock merlin XX has a ve of .94)

So a Merlin running 120% VE would be be running say 8lbs of boost would produce 1,221HP at WOT.

EDIT: To find required VE

Lets say i want my Merlin engine to develop 2,200HP at 3,200RPM In order to produce that i need to find the required VE

the BSFC is generally 12.5:1 air:gas i use .55 but typically its .45.
Generally Once you hit 900HP you should use .50 and up, anything over 1,000HP and your looking around .56

REQUIRED VE = ( 9411 x HP x BSFC ) / (DISPLACEMENT x RPM)

So

RVe=(9411x2,200x.55)/(1649x3,200)

(using .55BSFC) RvE=(11387310)/(5276800)=2.15 or 215%VE 2,188 HP
(using .45BSFC) RvE=(9316890)/(5276800)=1.76 or 176%Ve Or 1,791 HP

Obviously only VE over 100% can be achieved through either turbo or supercharging, that is another set of formulas which i have to find the paperwork for.



Note1 Use 3,200 as your Max HP or rated RPMyou would like to run, Max torque will be noted with a lower RPM. I used 3,200 because large displacement engines have a very low Max Sustainable RPM.

Note 2 VE is calculated based on %, so when people say 90%VE its actually .80, use the recommended points i added in up there. Incase you missed it here it is below

For 2 valve engines, use a VE of .8-.85 at torque peak and .7-.75 at power peak.

For 4 valve engines, use a VE of .9-.95 at torque peak and .85-.9 at power peak.

The difference between the Torque and the HP VE is based on RPM and the ability of the engine to breath. Assuming you do modification to the engine's heads headers, intake etic you can actually increase your numbers.

Adding superchargers and Turbos will result in VE's of 1.+ which means the engine is working at 100%+ efficiency. That is a different matter.


Im sure someone while have fun figuring this out, its just a basic formula about the theoretical HP an engine can produce, and if anyone needs help post and i'll explain it

[FordGT90Concept]

Yes, at the track my buddies F-450 kicks my trucks ass in the 1/4 mile, and so did my buddies 3500, but once you stuck 10,000lbs behind those trucks it was a different story.
And that sums it up. Ford and GM have V8s at higher RPMs granting better throttle response. That means a better drive around town. The Cummins straight 6 is designed for hauling stuff all the time. This is why Ford offers that very same engine in heavier chassis trucks (F-650 and F-750) and why GM/Ford take the cake in the 3/4-ton and 1-ton segments. Dodge has a big engine in a chassis that doesn't warrant it.

[pepsi71ocean]

And that sums it up. Ford and GM have V8s at higher RPMs granting better throttle response. That means a better drive around town. The Cummins straight 6 is designed for hauling stuff all the time. This is why Ford offers that very same engine in heavier chassis trucks (F-650 and F-750) and why GM/Ford take the cake in the 3/4-ton and 1-ton segments. Dodge has a big engine in a chassis that doesn't warrant it.

You get my point :D, Willie and i had a similar discussion a while ago.

The reason why Ford and chevys are quicker off the line is because their V-8 Diesels are known as Performance Diesels. The V configuration allows for a constant spin up, and the faster the RPM the faster the spin up, so in that case the V design is better for performance.

Dodge on the other hand uses inline I-6 diesels which have a narrower powerband, these are known as real diesels. Now inline's don't have an increased spool up, however they have a natural inherent ability to produce torque.

The advantages of both are known, and so are their faults.


Dodge can carry a heavier load because the power plant is superior, however they also have improved over the years, using subcontracts who make superior products have helped reliability a whole lot.

Aisin is a commercial transmission mfg, they make the automatics that are now found in semi's, it is things like that that make me happy to see that Dodge decided to outsource its critical power-train, instead of using as home built one.

(As for your truck trends article)

In contrast to the three-quarter-ton gas trucks, Dodge had a better story to tell with its six-speed 6.7-liter Cummins inline six diesel.

With the earliest torque curve among the one-tons (1,400-rpm versus 1,600-rpm in the Duramax and 2,000-rpm in the Power Stroke) and a 4.10 rear axle (versus 3.73 in the Ford and Chevrolet) the Ram owned the unloaded quarter mile. What's interesting to see in the results though is that by the very end of the run the other two trucks were really putting pressure on the Ram. The Dodge was the slowest of the three as it crossed the finish line. So, while the 4.10 definitely helped the Ram 3500 win the quarter-mile, the other two trucks were just coming into their own at the checkered flag.

Now, this is completely opposite to what we have from the trucks i race at home, Yes we all tow but we all have older trucks, so for us we have a 1999 Dodge 3500, a 2003 Ford F-450( had the 6.0L, second replacement was a 6.0L, and the last was a 6.4L) and a 2005 GMC 3500 (blew first power head, then GM replaced it with a LLY configuration)

SO my 4 speed sucks on a WOT 1/4 mile compared to the 5 speed ford and chevys, however, under load the 4 speed (well its a 3 speed with O/D) just carries the others away when towing a 10,000 lbs trailer with weight on it. (2WD, Nothing special), its under 10,000lbs that is where my Dodge shines. My truck has a consistent acceleration, weather its at 1,800 or 2,400 RPM.

Of course, the exception is 4th gear or O/D, because no matter what im towing, i can firewall the pedal and accelerate from 45 to 75 without any trouble.

The reason why my truck has uniform acceleration is because the Torque converter doesn't lock up until your in top gear ie O/D. so this allows the accumulated HP to be converted to torque, and visa versa.

So, yes the dodge isn't a performance truck, but i also know that no matter what i do acceleration wise im still moving what ever i put behind the truck, weather it is a 2,000lbs boat, or a 17,500lb 5th wheel camper.

the bottom line

Point is im Happy with what i have, and i wouldn't trade it for any other pickup on the market. i mean the newer Dodge CTD's are great, and i love driving the newer dodge9with sirus radio, heated seats, built in navigation, jake brake, and the 6 speed tranny), but there is this aura when im trucking of being the last generation of true cowboys.

I mean pulling into a diesel truck stop and filling up while i listen to my 5.9 just idle away, along with the big rigs, and having that big rig feel, and the loud noises coming from the solid lifters and tappets. There is just a different hum mm of a inline engine when compared to a powerstroke.

I just love driving down the road, listen to the truck hum along, and when i pass or lay into the turbo, i love the whirl and wine and the puuuusshhhhhhhhhh noise as i pass the slow pokes:D

[Wile E]

All Dodge guys know that Motor trend is heavily supported by Ford. And as such Ford will always come out on top.

Yes, at the track my buddies F-450 kicks my trucks ass in the 1/4 mile, and so did my buddies 3500, but once you stuck 10,000lbs behind those trucks it was a different story.

Especially now since the new 6 speed auto's are here, now i haven't taken the new truck to the track( and i highly doubt that the old man would let me do that either), but i would suspect that the new dodge 6 speed will beat otu the both 5 speed ford and chevy alternatives.

i figured ide post the Horse power calculations for an engine



Im sure someone while have fun figuring this out, its just a basic formula about the theoretical HP an engine can produce, and if anyone needs help post and i'll explain it
Ummm, that's only to figure out potential Horsepower form an engine. Useless if you are actually measuring the horsepower with a dyno.

Horsepower measurement is derived purely from torque measurements. The equation is no different if you have a gas engine, or a diesel, or even electric. No matter what you do, horsepower is Torque*rpm/5252.

And again, none of these semantics matter, the stuff that Dodge actually builds sucks balls. The commercial class truck you are talking about aren't even dodges anymore. This discussion wasn't even about commercial class trucks to begin with. You started that. How about we talk about Dodge's consumer grade gas powered trucks? ;)

[pepsi71ocean]

Ummm, that's only to figure out potential Horsepower form an engine. Useless if you are actually measuring the horsepower with a dyno.

Horsepower measurement is derived purely from torque measurements. The equation is no different if you have a gas engine, or a diesel, or even electric. No matter what you do, horsepower is Torque*rpm/5252.


I just said that is the horsepower equation, it works great for engines that are in the design stages, or to get the cumulative marks on an undynoed engine, assuming that the critical numbers needed are available to input.

I have used this calculation on several engine designed that i have built over the years. Everything from 600HP V-8's, 800HP V-10's and 1000HP V-12's.

But if you have an engine that only exists on paper, such as my 1,650CID V-12 Merlin rebuild. I don't have the money to build the engine yet, so instead i did the long math to get the block horsepower that the motor is capable of. Now i can also influence the torque ratings by extending the rods, running deeper skirts, and or longer stroke etic.


As for finding the torque through Horse power yes that is correct, But what if you have neither the horsepower or the torque, figured out, where do you start to say this motor makes a whopping 880HP at 3,300RPm with a .94 vE........ And then you can turn into the Superchargers lijne and say with a vE of xx you can now produce XXX HP at 3,300 Rpm.

from where i come from, i can't make such blank assertions without having some sort of backing mathematically. These calculations have been around for 100 years, and i doubt they are going anywhere anytime soon.



You started that. Yes i did, because i think dodge diesels and dodge gassers are on two totally different worlds.


How about we talk about Dodge's consumer grade gas powered trucks? ;)

Simple, the gassers suck, unless you replace it with an old mopar hemi six-pack with a nice over sized cam, 4 speed with a 5.56 rear :p

Gassers i hate, i frankly could care less about them. I never acquired a taste for gas, because i love the smell of diesel in the morning.:D

[Wile E]

I just said that is the horsepower equation, it works great for engines that are in the design stages, or to get the cumulative marks on an undynoed engine, assuming that the critical numbers needed are available to input.

I have used this calculation on several engine designed that i have built over the years. Everything from 600HP V-8's, 800HP V-10's and 1000HP V-12's.

But if you have an engine that only exists on paper, such as my 1,650CID V-12 Merlin rebuild. I don't have the money to build the engine yet, so instead i did the long math to get the block horsepower that the motor is capable of. Now i can also influence the torque ratings by extending the rods, running deeper skirts, and or longer stroke etic.


As for finding the torque through Horse power yes that is correct, But what if you have neither the horsepower or the torque, figured out, where do you start to say this motor makes a whopping 880HP at 3,300RPm with a .94 vE........ And then you can turn into the Superchargers lijne and say with a vE of xx you can now produce XXX HP at 3,300 Rpm.

from where i come from, i can't make such blank assertions without having some sort of backing mathematically. These calculations have been around for 100 years, and i doubt they are going anywhere anytime soon.


Yes i did, because i think dodge diesels and dodge gassers are on two totally different worlds.



Simple, the gassers suck, unless you replace it with an old mopar hemi six-pack with a nice over sized cam, 4 speed with a 5.56 rear :p

Gassers i hate, i frankly could care less about them. I never acquired a taste for gas, because i love the smell of diesel in the morning.:D

I perfectly understand the purpose of that equation. It just has no place in this thread.

So, if Dodge doesn't actually build their diesel powered trucks, and their gas trucks suck balls, how does Dodge make a good truck?

[pepsi71ocean]

So, if Dodge doesn't actually build their diesel powered trucks, and their gas trucks suck balls, how does Dodge make a good truck?

Because their Diesel truck line has improved in quality overall by alot since their glory years of 1994-2001 and then they lost it from 2002-2008. They are trying to bring back some sense of quality in their diesel line.

They had issues back when the 6.7L's came out, but that was all emissions crap, once dodge got the bugs worked out, and the owner has the do the other half, the truck works as required and performs just as well. by 2008 the CTD 3500 has a growing reputation as a reliable truck, something that will take dodge years to gain back their truck sales.


Its like ford doesn't make the frames for their F-550+ series, they are sub contracted just like dodge does, however the dodge frames now on the 3500's(at least the CTD version we have), even say they are made by the same company that makes Freightliner.

Its things like that that mean to me that they are trying, and the fact they are trying is what matters. Aisin makes a hell of a tranny, so much so that Dodge went to them and said "build us a transmission that will handle this 6.7L Cummins with room to spare"

That 68rfe beats out the old 727 designed 48re transmission that sucked balls unless it was tuned properly, and tuning a 48re was extremely hard to do, and the tranny had reached the limits of its capacity.


What im saying is that no truck line has been perfect, we could go on for hours on end about the ford truck issues ranging from the early 7.3's to the massive headache of the 6.0's, it took international about 5 years to get the 7.3 to be a reliable motor. But duramax sucked ass as well until isuzu took it over and turned into the LLY configuration, that made the duramax a suitable motor.

Dodge never had major engine issues, just stupid crap, little things like the check ball lock in the lift pump, When you let off the pedal the check ball would engage, and cause a restriction in the lift pump, and burn the lift pump motor out, as the motor burned out it took the VP44 with it. This effects the 1999-2001 24v ctd motors, after 2001 they went to hpcr injection.

Once you get rid of that check ball the stock lift pump is fine, but most put in fass or airdogg 150's just for the hell of it.


Yes the dodge diesel trannys were fine(47rh and 47re), they just used a weak TQ, and as (i mentioned above) the tq doesn't lock up until you are in top gear, which mean that the fluid coupling is heating up, when the tq burned up it made the tranny act like it was dead, when if you caught the tq issue soon enough you could prevent all hell from breaking loose, but yes the trannys weren't hot, for about 3K you can get a bullet proof 47re, that will handle 525HP and 1050lbs of torque.

Why didn't the tq lock up till top gear, this allowed the transmission to take the unused Torque and turn it into horsepower, this is why a dodge gets great mileage. when im driving down the high way at 60mph, and doing 1,700rpm im running on about 70HP empty. that is because im only asking for 80hp from the engine, the other 450lbs of torque are turned into HP, and as such the engine doesn't burn as much in fuel.

As for their gassers, i never researched them, i don;'t know much about gas engines in general, my knowledge is diesel and aviation engines.

[Wile E]

Because their Diesel truck line has improved in quality overall by alot since their glory years of 1994-2001 and then they lost it from 2002-2008. They are trying to bring back some sense of quality in their diesel line.

They had issues back when the 6.7L's came out, but that was all emissions crap, once dodge got the bugs worked out, and the owner has the do the other half, the truck works as required and performs just as well. by 2008 the CTD 3500 has a growing reputation as a reliable truck, something that will take dodge years to gain back their truck sales.


Its like ford doesn't make the frames for their F-550+ series, they are sub contracted just like dodge does, however the dodge frames now on the 3500's(at least the CTD version we have), even say they are made by the same company that makes Freightliner.

Its things like that that mean to me that they are trying, and the fact they are trying is what matters. Aisin makes a hell of a tranny, so much so that Dodge went to them and said "build us a transmission that will handle this 6.7L Cummins with room to spare"

That 68rfe beats out the old 727 designed 48re transmission that sucked balls unless it was tuned properly, and tuning a 48re was extremely hard to do, and the tranny had reached the limits of its capacity.


What im saying is that no truck line has been perfect, we could go on for hours on end about the ford truck issues ranging from the early 7.3's to the massive headache of the 6.0's, it took international about 5 years to get the 7.3 to be a reliable motor. But duramax sucked ass as well until isuzu took it over and turned into the LLY configuration, that made the duramax a suitable motor.

Dodge never had major engine issues, just stupid crap, little things like the check ball lock in the lift pump, When you let off the pedal the check ball would engage, and cause a restriction in the lift pump, and burn the lift pump motor out, as the motor burned out it took the VP44 with it. This effects the 1999-2001 24v ctd motors, after 2001 they went to hpcr injection.

Once you get rid of that check ball the stock lift pump is fine, but most put in fass or airdogg 150's just for the hell of it.


Yes the dodge diesel trannys were fine(47rh and 47re), they just used a weak TQ, and as (i mentioned above) the tq doesn't lock up until you are in top gear, which mean that the fluid coupling is heating up, when the tq burned up it made the tranny act like it was dead, when if you caught the tq issue soon enough you could prevent all hell from breaking loose, but yes the trannys weren't hot, for about 3K you can get a bullet proof 47re, that will handle 525HP and 1050lbs of torque.

Why didn't the tq lock up till top gear, this allowed the transmission to take the unused Torque and turn it into horsepower, this is why a dodge gets great mileage. when im driving down the high way at 60mph, and doing 1,700rpm im running on about 70HP empty. that is because im only asking for 80hp from the engine, the other 450lbs of torque are turned into HP, and as such the engine doesn't burn as much in fuel.

As for their gassers, i never researched them, i don;'t know much about gas engines in general, my knowledge is diesel and aviation engines.
Again, Dodge didn't build the diesel trucks. So how does Dodge make a good truck?

[pepsi71ocean]

Again, Dodge didn't build the diesel trucks. So how does Dodge make a good truck?

simple i don;t count their gassers as part of the pick up line, they aren't manly enough for me:D

(the answer i know you want to hear is ringing in my head, but its simple i don;'t thinkt heir gas trucks are worthy of trucks. or maybe ive spent to much time with my truck and its internal workings to see the bigger picture)


So then my question to you is, does dodge make a good diesel truck?

[Wile E]

simple i don;t count their gassers as part of the pick up line, they aren't manly enough for me:D

(the answer i know you want to hear is ringing in my head, but its simple i don;'t thinkt heir gas trucks are worthy of trucks. or maybe ive spent to much time with my truck and its internal workings to see the bigger picture)


So then my question to you is, does dodge make a good diesel truck?

No, they don't. Sterling, Aisin, and Cummins do. :D

[pepsi71ocean]

No, they don't. Sterling, Aisin, and Cummins do. :D

Funny :p Sterling Aisin and Cummins are all in that damm dodge diesel :D, Now if only i knew if they could only fix the rusty door issues, with the bad window sealing up top, and put some proper drain holes into bottom of the doors..... Maybe some rhino lining on the inside of the doors, or epoxy.:rolleyes:


sounds like an idea for my 3500, once im done bending all new brake tubing:D

[Wile E]

That's my point. Dodge has the "anti-Midas" Touch. They can take gold, touch it, and it turns to shit. Everything that Dodge puts on the trucks is a POS. The should've just had Sterling build the whole chassis, and rebadged it. (But then the badges would rust. :D)

[pepsi71ocean]

That's my point. Dodge has the "anti-Midas" Touch. They can take gold, touch it, and it turns to shit. Everything that Dodge puts on the trucks is a POS. The should've just had Sterling build the whole chassis, and rebadged it. (But then the badges would rust. :D)

the brakes were 10 years old, its ok we did my buddies F-350 last year :D, Except his was worse, almost caused an accident with his set up.

The chassis on the new dodges are amazing, compared to mine. And my door rusting issue is a known one. then again my F-350 buddy, his door is rusting out as well.

We used something called poly coat on his truck, do you know if its any good, ive been bending regular hard line steel.

[Wile E]

the brakes were 10 years old, its ok we did my buddies F-350 last year :D, Except his was worse, almost caused an accident with his set up.

The chassis on the new dodges are amazing, compared to mine. And my door rusting issue is a known one. then again my F-350 buddy, his door is rusting out as well.

We used something called poly coat on his truck, do you know if its any good, ive been bending regular hard line steel.

Where did you use the poly coat? And most non-generic poly coatings are created equal. It's the generic ones you need to watch.

[pepsi71ocean]

Where did you use the poly coat? And most non-generic poly coatings are created equal. It's the generic ones you need to watch.

Every hard line, his tubing was rusting quite badly, the Napa guys said that this stuff was 'rust' resistant. And that all the shops buy it, i think he said polymer coated steel or something of that sorts. And that it bends easily, and it did, i could bend it with my hands.

i was thinking of trying it, but im a little weary of green colored brake line that you can bend with a finger. and that makes me question how "good" it is.

that shit was expensive 80 bucks for about 25 feet of it.

[Steevo]

I like how they had to run twin turbos and NOS on a Cummins to outpower a larger injector and custom mapped duramax.


I have friends who hare hardcore into diesel tuning, and they all choose duramaxes, and yes, they buy a $1700 upgrade kit for the allison transmission and it will hold as manyHP and Ft Lbs as you can make, and some are running larger turbos, huge exhaust, propane injection, larger injectors, CAI and more. Pulling a 35' fifth wheel camper/snowmobile trailer full loaded up the side of the mountain barely pushing the engine, no other mods needed.

[pepsi71ocean]

I like how they had to run twin turbos and NOS on a Cummins to outpower a larger injector and custom mapped duramax.


Did those guys use the Marine or the RV275 injectors, what about the F001's or DDs? what year motor, was it a tapped VP44 or was it a HPCR, a P7100 perhaps?......... you can get a Cummins to out power a Duramax with larger injectors, but most guys don't know what to do to an inline to get her to whirl.

They weren't doing it right... I know guys who are pushing 525HP, 1100lbs of torque out of a 1999 Cummins 5.9L, and they are running single stage turbos....

I know guys pushing close to 800HP and 1,600ftlbs out of the 6.7L Cummins engines.

And neither were running twin turbos.


But i say one again a Cummins isn't a Performance Diesel, it doesn't to be tuned out to wild numbers to get the effect needed, also you must compare apples to apples, if it is a 1999 Cummins and a 1999 Duramax they are in no comparison the Cummins would win flat out., Now after Duramax fixed the issues and went to the lly and then to the lbz, then the Durashit became a duramax....

Its all relative, you want performance or reliability.... because the Cummins will outlast both the powerchoke and dura max by hundred of thousands of miles.

I know guys pushing 500,000 miles with 1999 Dodge 3500's with auto's, i know guys pushing 950,000 miles with older 1994 cummins powered dodges....

Likewise i have a friend who has a F-450 whith 187,000 miles and 3 blown power heads, and a transmission i swear that is shot....... I know guys who rebuilt 7.3L powerstrokes that have only 400,000 miles and had to be completely rebuilt after 200K, and yet i know a guy who has 675,000 miles on his Cummins powered dodge 3500(1999), and has only need to do a valve adjustment at 330K, outside of that the truck ate 1 IP and that was around 175K, the second Ip is the same one that he replaced the first one with....

[Wile E]

Did those guys use the Marine or the RV275 injectors, what about the F001's or DDs? what year motor, was it a tapped VP44 or was it a HPCR, a P7100 perhaps?......... you can get a Cummins to out power a Duramax with larger injectors, but most guys don't know what to do to an inline to get her to whirl.

They weren't doing it right... I know guys who are pushing 525HP, 1100lbs of torque out of a 1999 Cummins 5.9L, and they are running single stage turbos....

I know guys pushing close to 800HP and 1,600ftlbs out of the 6.7L Cummins engines.

And neither were running twin turbos.


But i say one again a Cummins isn't a Performance Diesel, it doesn't to be tuned out to wild numbers to get the effect needed, also you must compare apples to apples, if it is a 1999 Cummins and a 1999 Duramax they are in no comparison the Cummins would win flat out., Now after Duramax fixed the issues and went to the lly and then to the lbz, then the Durashit became a duramax....

Its all relative, you want performance or reliability.... because the Cummins will outlast both the powerchoke and dura max by hundred of thousands of miles.

I know guys pushing 500,000 miles with 1999 Dodge 3500's with auto's, i know guys pushing 950,000 miles with older 1994 cummins powered dodges....

Likewise i have a friend who has a F-450 whith 187,000 miles and 3 blown power heads, and a transmission i swear that is shot....... I know guys who rebuilt 7.3L powerstrokes that have only 400,000 miles and had to be completely rebuilt after 200K, and yet i know a guy who has 675,000 miles on his Cummins powered dodge 3500(1999), and has only need to do a valve adjustment at 330K, outside of that the truck ate 1 IP and that was around 175K, the second Ip is the same one that he replaced the first one with....
ANd for all of your "I know guy that had to rebuilt their Duramax/Powerstroke at XX miles", you can find an equal statement about a Cummins.

And vice versa about "I know a guy who got xx miles out of a cummins". There are plenty that have gotten that kind of mileage out of powerstrokes and duramax.

Those kind of stories never speak for the overall majority.

[Steevo]

I know of one who put his CAI right in the front lower part of his grille, when traveling up I-70 through snow and slush, the nice air filter passes some road slush-spray and pushed it into a nice hot turbo. From there shit went wrong.

[3991v]

ANd for all of your "I know guy that had to rebuilt their Duramax/Powerstroke at XX miles", you can find an equal statement about a Cummins.

And vice versa about "I know a guy who got xx miles out of a cummins". There are plenty that have gotten that kind of mileage out of powerstrokes and duramax.

Exactly.

[pepsi71ocean]

ANd for all of your "I know guy that had to rebuilt their Duramax/Powerstroke at XX miles", you can find an equal statement about a Cummins.

And vice versa about "I know a guy who got xx miles out of a cummins". There are plenty that have gotten that kind of mileage out of powerstrokes and duramax.

Those kind of stories never speak for the overall majority.

This is true, because no engine will take neglect or abuse, all engines have a life span, and for the most part the Cummins will outlast, but im not saying that duramaxes and powersrtrokes won't last either, if you treat it nicely any engine will last.

Willie, did you ever see about that polycoat?

[Wile E]

This is true, because no engine will take neglect or abuse, all engines have a life span, and for the most part the Cummins will outlast, but im not saying that duramaxes and powersrtrokes won't last either, if you treat it nicely any engine will last.

Willie, did you ever see about that polycoat?

Missed the post.

I just don't see how the cost to benefit ratio is there, plus with it being flexible like that, it will be more prone to expansion, taking away pedal modulation and brake feel. Sure, it may never rust, but you could change your hard lines 4 or 5 times for the price of that stuff. I doubt the truck will live long enough for that stuff to pay for itself over standard hard lines. lol

[pepsi71ocean]

Missed the post.

I just don't see how the cost to benefit ratio is there, plus with it being flexible like that, it will be more prone to expansion, taking away pedal modulation and brake feel. Sure, it may never rust, but you could change your hard lines 4 or 5 times for the price of that stuff. I doubt the truck will live long enough for that stuff to pay for itself over standard hard lines. lol

lol, well ive put about 100,000 miles on the truck since i got it, and ive never usually towed anything over gvwr 24,000lbs, (but i have off the record), point is im thinking that just for pure safety i think that regular hard line would be better then this poly coat stuff, but ive never heard of it until the napa guy sold my buddy on it.

typically im towing loads between 10K and 18K, so reliable braking is important.

Funny, i lost the brakes because i got cut off at a light by some jerk on a cell phone, blew through the intersection with 14K right on my ass. Scared the shit out of me though.