[quote=MW95F250]Assuming that the pull is on pavement, both trucks have the same gearing and the same tires, the Cat would eat the Cummins for lunch at the same HP and tq. ratings.[quote]
Same gearing, tires, HP, and torque both applied in the 650 and the CAT would win? Gotta disagree with you on that one, I think the CTD would win a pull off due to the fact it makes more power at lower RPM's and once it would get the tires of the CAT spinning the contest would be over except for the crying. I gotta wonder sometimes reading the posts around here, did a Dodge salesman insult your mothers or why is everybody so intent on proving to the world that Dodge and the CTD are crap? I mean if some dudes Dodge falls apart at low mileage i would say either a lemon or they hot rodded that crap out of it, and based on some stories i would put my money on the latter.
[quote=BigDaddy6969][quote=MW95F250]Assuming that the pull is on pavement, both trucks have the same gearing and the same tires, the Cat would eat the Cummins for lunch at the same HP and tq. ratings.
Quote:
Same gearing, tires, HP, and torque both applied in the 650 and the CAT would win? Gotta disagree with you on that one, I think the CTD would win a pull off due to the fact it makes more power at lower RPM's and once it would get the tires of the CAT spinning the contest would be over except for the crying.
Whoa man you are way off track. The Cat is the lowest revving engine of the 3 available and the Cummins is the highest.....how would that make it have more power at lower RPM? The specs prove other wise.......
I had always been told that the CAT diesel in fords 1 ton+ trucks would spin the tires off the truck at 75 if you punched it but didnt have the low end of the CTD, i am neighbors with a guy who has driven nothing but 650's and 750's for his ranch pickup for the last 5 years and i know he hated the PSD, got a cat, has a CTD and is looking into getting another CTD, dont know what tranny he has however, but he is sure putting alot of money into ranch trucks so they must be doing him some justice.
I had always been told that the CAT diesel in fords 1 ton+ trucks would spin the tires off the truck at 75 if you punched it but didnt have the low end of the CTD, i am neighbors with a guy who has driven nothing but 650's and 750's for his ranch pickup for the last 5 years and i know he hated the PSD, got a cat, has a CTD and is looking into getting another CTD, dont know what tranny he has however, but he is sure putting alot of money into ranch trucks so they must be doing him some justice.
Pure hearsay again. Cat gets the job done on the farm in the dump truck, and it has tons of low end, no wheel spin unless you drop into low range at such high speeds. I can put the dump truck in 1st gear (Chevy/Cat/Eaton 5spd.)and at idle it will climb out of the creek bed, 5.13 rear gears. No Cummins could do that unless it was geared extremely low like a 6.80.
I dont know i guess, as far as myself any 650 is WAY out of line, i can get by on any 1 ton of the big 3 but i do prefer the CTD over the PSD and certainly over the DMAX for the kid of pulling i do and i can get the pickup bought for quite a bit cheaper in my area, I guess if the 7.2 ever got put into a Ford i would be probably one of the first people to try it being the motor head i am. And i dont want to hear how dodges fall apart quickly, my last CTD went 234000 miles with more than half of those towing a horse trailer with at least 2-3 head in it and the only thing i replaced was ONE clutch, but then again it being a diesel it still hadnt gone anywhere close to my 94 F150 XLT I6 or half as far as my 77 Hiboy 351.
Ummm, the F-650 comes with your choice of an Allison 5 speed automatic or an Eaton 6 speed manual or Spicer 7 speed manual. Ford knows that 6 ain't enough, but to be fair, Dodge doesn't even attempt to make trucks that compete with this one, as much as their salesmen would have you believe that a 3500 Ram is as strong. But, as we see, when it comes to serious work trucks, Dodge doesn't even try to compete. Smart move by Dodge.
Ok, now in the F-650/F-750 line, here are your choices:
Powerstroke
200hp/520 lb-ft
215hp/540 lb-ft
230hp/540 lb-ft
230hp/620 lb-ft
Cummins
185hp/420 lb-ft (not much at all for the base Cummins)
200hp/520 lb-ft (that's BASE PSD numbers)
215hp/520 lb-ft
230hp/520 lb-ft
245hp/660 lb-ft
260hp/550 lb-ft (nope, that's not a misprint for torque)
260hp/660 lb-ft
275hp/660 lb-ft
CAT
190hp/520 lb-ft (small numbers)
210hp/520 lb-ft
210hp/605 lb-ft
230hp/540 lb-ft
230hp/660 lb-ft
250hp/660 lb-ft
275hp/800 lb-ft (Where the CAT starts to shine and show why it's worth it)
300hp/800 lb-ft
300hp/860 lb-ft
So there are only three possible ways to get a Cummins with more torque than even the PSD in the F-650/F-750 lines, and I bet they cost a pretty penny to upgrade them. So why even upgrade to the Cummins?
Ford also has dyno sheets posted on their site for the top of the line of each engine. http://www.commtruck.ford.com/ctw/default.asp
As you can see, top of the line vs top of the line, they go like this:
PSD
230hp@2600rpms 620lb-ft@1500rpms
Cummins
275hp@2500rpms 660lb-ft@1600rpms
CAT
300hp@2200rpms 860lb-ft@1440rpms
So, when looking at that, to make it's peak torque, the Cummins is the highest revving of all 3.
Megalodon1, How much does it cost to upgrade to the top of the line PSD? I bet you could save a lot and upgrade to a much better truck. I wouldn't pay money to have a Cummins that has 45 more hp and 40 more lb-ft, that hardly seems worth paying for, especially when it's the top of the line Cummins and the PSD isn't too far behind it. I just can't see where it's worth it to upgrade from the PSD to the Cummins. Shoot, give me that 860 lb-ft CAT with a 7 speed Spicer manual any day.
Actually FordLariat, this is clearly one of your better posts - except for the bit of Dodge bashing you opened with - but I can live with it since it's only half truth anyway. You see, in as much as Dodge and Chrysler are not the same brand - they are both owned by DC. And DC does in fact compete very well in the medium duty market - in fact they sell the most medium duty trucks from what I have heard - at least when you combine the Freightliner and Mercedes names together.
I see your logic regarding the PSD and Cummins - very good points btw, but some of your information is dated. I would definately consider the PSD - as long as it's the same engine as the VT 365 used in medium duty International trucks, which going by the numbers I'm supposing it is - then reliability should not be an issue. Just to clarify things a bit regarding power however - the 230HP/620LBFT PSD option is no longer available.
The highest current rating for the 6.0 in F650 trucks is 230HP/540LBFT. This option comes with a cost of 500.00 over the standard engine. The best Cummins offering comes in a hair under 3,900.00 (I checked and found that I actually overstated the cost of the Cummins in my earlier post). This lowers the price difference between the best PSD and best Cummins to about 3,500.00. For this you gain 120LBFT and 45HP.
Getting back to the Cat - the best one which makes substantial power/and torque over the Cummins will cost an extra 8,600.00 - or 4,700.00 more than the top Cummins offering. For this you gain 200 LBFT and 25 HP.
So what does all of this mean? To me it means Ford offers three viable options as far as diesel engines go in their 650 trucks - not only two viable options and one wasteful one. The top Cummins motor will cost you an extra 3,900.00 more than the STANDARD 6.0 motor. You gain 140LBFT and 75HP.
The top Cat motor will cost you an extra 4,700.00 more than the top Cummins motor. You gain 200LBFT and 25HP.
There are a few fill in motor options with varying prices and power levels and I feel the Cummins compares rather well for what you get in comparision with the other two options IMO. The 650 series can be used in a countless number of ways. For 90% of these uses the best 6.0 would be adequete IMO. The best Cummins would be acceptable for 99% of these uses IMO, and the last remaining 1% might actually require the most powerful Cat offering.
Unless I actually NEEDED the power of the Cat, I'd probably not consider it for the price premium - though I would definately consider the savings the PSD would offer if my uses were mainly in the lighter spectrum of F650 capability.
All of this refers only to power for price. For emmissions and fuel injection technology - Cummins is simpler and more reliable - Cat's are very expensive for replacement parts and Acert technology is problematic - this is no myth.
Actually FordLariat, this is clearly one of your better posts - except for the bit of Dodge bashing you opened with - but I can live with it since it's only half truth anyway. You see, in as much as Dodge and Chrysler are not the same brand - they are both owned by DC. And DC does in fact compete very well in the medium duty market - in fact they sell the most medium duty trucks from what I have heard - at least when you combine the Freightliner and Mercedes names together.
Also remember DC owns Sterling truck as well, but Ford has bought it back and plans to reintroduce the Louisville Series trucks in 2007.
Quote:
For emmissions and fuel injection technology - Cummins is simpler and more reliable - Cat's are very expensive for replacement parts and Acert technology is problematic - this is no myth.
The Cummins has problems with lift pumps, transfer pumps, and injectors, this is a widely known fact.
I need proof of the Cat problems as I have not heard of such, and I'm in a position where I would know these things, NC State College of Engineering, the best engineering institution in the Southeast. Cat is a major employer of NCSU Mechanical and Agricultural Engineering grads.
now if ya can't see by my name i am brand loyal to gm.
beyond that for diesels i would say that cummins is very reliable motor and does generally get a little better fuel economy than the other 2 V8s but i wouldn't give you much for a dodge automatic transmission. there manual is fine and i really don't know much about the rest of the truck to comment on it other than i have rode in one to tell about the interior.
the ford has a relatively reliable motor but the 6.0 is not as good as the 7.3, i have heard but can't prove that ford kind of went there own way on the 6.0 and it was not as intragrated with international hense the less durable engine. the torque shift also has a couple different recalls on it as of right now. the ford is the fastest dragracer stock.
the duramax has the allison which is the best in my opinion but some have had problems with the neutral reverse switch but that seems to be all except for a few scarce problems. this transmission will also cover 400 hp and up to 600lb feet of torque with out exploding. (aka a chip) the duramax has had problems with injectors on the lb7 or the earlier motor but the newer 2004.5+ injectors seem to be much more reliable with very few problems. as for towing up hills with heavy loads the duramax will do it faster as the test is done by kennedydiesel (under dmax performance) each year.
each has there plus and menos not to get into the brand war which i love to laugh at as well as take place in. i try to keep all of my posts to facts as people are here for information not B.S.
duramaximizer,
I've posted a link to the test you've mentioned before. I'd have to dig through the archives to find it again. I think the test your thinking of is when Motovet took top honors out in Montana? Most trucks were fairly well beefed up except 1 2004.5 dmax that was stock and he had 1 of the highest top speeds at the end of his run.
The injector issues seem to be limited to 2001 model year. GM did right by the customer and put a 200,000 mile warranty on the injectors through 2003.
Back to the orginal post:
It's hard to say with the 6.0 if it gets better gas milage. I've seen some people say they get as low as 12 mpg and some say as high as 21. So there is a lil inconsistancy with that motor yet. The 7.3 litre does for sure and seems to be consistent with what I get with my Dmax [had both] which 18-19mpg, above 40, hwy and city driving. Pulling - all brands seem to be about equal taking all factors into consideration, wind, load, speed, etc ..
__________________
2007 D/A - Crew cab LT Z71 3/4 ton - lots of goodies
Its probably safe to say that the diesels today with the latest power upgrades will not get the mileage off the older generations. A friend of mine has a duramax and hes only getting 16 to 17 tops. Its a 2004 model. I have a 7.3 PSD and regularly get 18 to 20 MPG. The 6.0 the newer duramax and the new cummins more then likly will not get that kind of mileage.
the new 06 duramax is getting an updated 5 speed transmission to the 6 speed i hear no extra gears just another combination to get a double overdrive. i can't put a link on here because i am not allowed yet but i would pm it to someone if i could for you to post that would be great
the new 06 duramax is getting an updated 5 speed transmission to the 6 speed i hear no extra gears just another combination to get a double overdrive. i can't put a link on here because i am not allowed yet but i would pm it to someone if i could for you to post that would be great
You sure you're not confusing it with the manual trans? The ZF-6 manual is a 6 speed offered in the GM's.
Actually FordLariat, this is clearly one of your better posts - except for the bit of Dodge bashing you opened with - but I can live with it since it's only half truth anyway. You see, in as much as Dodge and Chrysler are not the same brand - they are both owned by DC. And DC does in fact compete very well in the medium duty market - in fact they sell the most medium duty trucks from what I have heard - at least when you combine the Freightliner and Mercedes names together.
I see your logic regarding the PSD and Cummins - very good points btw, but some of your information is dated. I would definately consider the PSD - as long as it's the same engine as the VT 365 used in medium duty International trucks, which going by the numbers I'm supposing it is - then reliability should not be an issue. Just to clarify things a bit regarding power however - the 230HP/620LBFT PSD option is no longer available.
The highest current rating for the 6.0 in F650 trucks is 230HP/540LBFT. This option comes with a cost of 500.00 over the standard engine. The best Cummins offering comes in a hair under 3,900.00 (I checked and found that I actually overstated the cost of the Cummins in my earlier post). This lowers the price difference between the best PSD and best Cummins to about 3,500.00. For this you gain 120LBFT and 45HP.
Getting back to the Cat - the best one which makes substantial power/and torque over the Cummins will cost an extra 8,600.00 - or 4,700.00 more than the top Cummins offering. For this you gain 200 LBFT and 25 HP.
So what does all of this mean? To me it means Ford offers three viable options as far as diesel engines go in their 650 trucks - not only two viable options and one wasteful one. The top Cummins motor will cost you an extra 3,900.00 more than the STANDARD 6.0 motor. You gain 140LBFT and 75HP.
The top Cat motor will cost you an extra 4,700.00 more than the top Cummins motor. You gain 200LBFT and 25HP.
There are a few fill in motor options with varying prices and power levels and I feel the Cummins compares rather well for what you get in comparision with the other two options IMO. The 650 series can be used in a countless number of ways. For 90% of these uses the best 6.0 would be adequete IMO. The best Cummins would be acceptable for 99% of these uses IMO, and the last remaining 1% might actually require the most powerful Cat offering.
Unless I actually NEEDED the power of the Cat, I'd probably not consider it for the price premium - though I would definately consider the savings the PSD would offer if my uses were mainly in the lighter spectrum of F650 capability.
All of this refers only to power for price. For emmissions and fuel injection technology - Cummins is simpler and more reliable - Cat's are very expensive for replacement parts and Acert technology is problematic - this is no myth.
I have to disagree, there's an order form right now on ford.com's commercial truck webpage where you can order those engines, I took them directly off the site as I was posting them, it's up to date. Also, just because DC bought Dodge doesn't automatically mean that their trucks have the same reputation as all MB or Freightliner trucks, how much have they actually redesigned since taking over the company? I didn't see a complete and total redesign from Dodge...It's also no myth that the CAT will generally not need to be worked on and replaced as often as the Cummins will...Dodge fans tend to look at vehicles and engines based on how much it will cost to replace parts or repair the engine, this is generally not the case from Ford fans...That says something to me...
So your hauling cattle? What type of weight and speeds will you be doing. Is it mostly under 50 and back country roads or will you be mostly at freeway speeds.
The wight will really very Between depending how many cattle I need to load, as far as speed it won't bet much more than 55 M.P.H. due to the hilly area and all the bends and turns. I already ruled out an auto trans. The one I own now is the last one that I will ever own for a work truck.
__________________
1999.5 F-350 PSD auto 4x4 SRW
6637 air filter
removed muffler (no cat)
10K MOD.
disconnected wastegate
I have to disagree, there's an order form right now on ford.com's commercial truck webpage where you can order those engines, I took them directly off the site as I was posting them, it's up to date. Also, just because DC bought Dodge doesn't automatically mean that their trucks have the same reputation as all MB or Freightliner trucks, how much have they actually redesigned since taking over the company? I didn't see a complete and total redesign from Dodge...It's also no myth that the CAT will generally not need to be worked on and replaced as often as the Cummins will...Dodge fans tend to look at vehicles and engines based on how much it will cost to replace parts or repair the engine, this is generally not the case from Ford fans...That says something to me...
Well that's exactly where I obtained my information as well. It states clearly in all CAPITAL letters, which are set in parenthesis = (DISCONTINUED).
I checked under more than just one configuration of F650 as well - using information for both the pro loader and straight frame railed versions.
Also your confusing the matter regarding DC. You intially decided to give Dodge a nice little bashing in one of your posts. You said something about being at least smart enough to not try to compete with Ford in the medium duty market. I merely pointed out the truth of the matter - DC owns Dodge.
This means it is DC - not "Dodge" (which is merely a nameplate), who is in direct competition with Ford in ALL markets - be it heavy duty trucks, medium duty trucks, light duty trucks, family sedans, sports cars, etc.
DC does not need to turn Dodge into a medium duty competitor any more than they need to turn MB or Freightliner into light duty competitors. They have both markets covered with different brands.
A "complete redesign" is not necessary in order to interject a parent companies qualities. The size, shape, or appearance of exterior sheet metal panels or interior fabrics does not dictate quality - those are merely aesthetics.
Quality comes from attention to detail, following good engineering principles, paying heed to customer preferences, ensuring a long lasting product, and providing good services after the sale.
This portion deserves special attention;
Dodge fans tend to look at vehicles and engines based on how much it will cost to replace parts or repair the engine, this is generally not the case from Ford fans...That says something to me...
A new truck costs tens of thousands of dollars. This is a large investment for most people. Those Dodge "fans" as you put it, are merely doing what any responsible buyer should do. It's enough to know that none of us can tell for sure what will or will not fail on a vehicle in the future, and having some semblence of the likelihood of particular parts failing and the associated costs of those parts only makes sense. If Ford "fans" are not taking a similar approach, perhaps it is because they do not intend to keep their vehicles as long. Ease of maintenance is another aspect - like how difficult it will be to access or change sparkplugs, alternator, starter, fan belt, oil changes, etc.
And I will say something to you as well - tommorrow I go to pick up my 98 F150. I will be forking over 1,465.00 for repairs which were needed. Repairs which clearly came about as a result of defective parts installed at a Ford factory. Not regular maintenance items, but the kind of defective parts
which can kill a motor.
Perhaps if I traded my truck every few years, I could afford not to worry about ease/costs of maintenance issues. As it is, inspite of all my maintenance, I'm stuck paying for a defect I could not possibly know
about at the time of purchase - Ford said they were all better now.
Again, I can live with it (I have to), and nothing is perfect - not even reputations, but believe what you will.
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. FordŽ is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.
