1. Cummins has been around a long time but the powerstroke is an International design and built (ford owns the rights to the motor where dodge doesn't the cummins) and International has been around a long time also.
2. Yes less moving parts.
3. It was GM's early try at diesels that were actually beefed up 350 converts. This caused such a bad taste for GM diesel's that they to this day are playing catchup to both Ford and Dodge. By the way the Duramax is really a pretty decent engine.

All have their problems and their good points. I thnk the Cummins is actually the better engine but if you take the whole picture in the Ford wins everytime. Look back in history and you will see the same problem, Chrysler Corp has always made some awesome amd durable drivetrains but have had serious problems making durable bodies to put them in. I am a die hard Ford fan and always will but look at the record and facts and I believe the cummins is the better engine. As far a Mitsi goes they have been making more diesels and for longer than any of them but right now they are in trouble and falling fast in the market area.

 

Sinister,
You would make a very convincing argument, except for the fact that some of your "Facts" are wrong. Dodge 1500's have 13.2" brakes in front and 13.9" in back. F150's have 13.0" brakes in front and 13.7" in back. Also, although the new Ford may not have a fully hydroformed frame, the front section is hydroformed and the entire frame is boxed, so again, the advantage is not quite as HUGE as you would have liked. Sorry to burst your bubble.

 

____________________________

The specs I was referring to are regarding 3/4 and 1 ton trucks. So I accept your compliment bigsnag- it's nice to hear that my arguement is convincing-
I try to stick to the facts as best I can.

 

Then stick to the fact that in 1/2 ton trucks, the Dodge can't haul or tow as much as the Ford, regardless of any frame, axle, tranny or engine specs. Other than hauling/towing, what are these trucks for? Also, the Ford is more comfortable in the ride, and it has the quietest in-cab ride. Also, the new F-150 is MUCH safer than the Dodge, and Ford doesn't have to resort to misnamed engines and marketing to move ther vehicles. There's some FACTS for you, the Ford is quieter, tows more, hauls more and is safer. Anything else to worry about in a truck? Not too much, I imagine. I'm not going to go into my personal experiences with Dodge trucks, that's already in another thread somewhere here.
Onto bigger trucks, sinister73, I believe that even though the connecting rods on the Cummins are much larger than the ones on the PSD, the PSD's rods are stronger. I have never seen anything that says otherwise, and bigger is not always better, so if you would like to keep this as a valid argument, then I would like to see some test results that say otherwise. If an inline 6 was as much better of a design that you make it out to be, Ford would still be using the 300. Again with the ATF complaint? Seriously, how much complication is going with the ATF and the fancy colling devices? Nowhere near as much as there is with an extremely hot transmission. The Sterling 10.25 has proven to be enough for the Ford, I haven't seen very and buybacks or recalls on them due to their rear-end, nor because of ATF or fancy cooling devices, so that's not a very good argument. The Cummins is as of right now the most powerful diesel offered in a pickup (up to the 350 platform), but how long has it been? Oh yeah, the 7.3 OWNED it the entire time it was produced, so don't give me that `tried and true` crap, until this year it was the lowest-powered diesel offered. Not to mention that the current Cummins is NOTHING AT ALL like the first Cummins used in a Dodge, yeah, they're both inline 6 cylinders, but that's about where the similarities end. Stock for stock, according to Dodge's website, the new Cummins has over 1,300 major design changes since it's inception in Dodge pickups. It doesn't matter, the 2005 6.0 is going to drop it back into obscurity once again, where it belongs. sinister73 has already stated more than once that no matter what Ford does, the Dodge will have a better diesel, and it will never be beat. This, my friends, is brand-biased, closed-minded to anything that might happen in the future, his mind is made up. The Cummins gets one year of being on top and all we hear is how it's the best engine ever (which, by the way, is purely your opinion, not anywhere in anyway is that a fact), when the only reason that it is on top is because Dodge ripped the idea of pilot injection from Ford and released this engine a few months after the 6.0 came out. It never beat the 7.3 in any catergory except for simplicity until the 7.3 wasn't made anymore.

So, MJD, you see, while sinister73's post was a great comparison, 6 lines of it are facts, and the rest are his opinions. If the Cummins is so great, then why did we get the new Cummins 600? Because it wasn't competing with Ford, and it has only led for one year, after they applied Ford's ideas to it, after the new Ford had come out. Let's not forget about that. Oh, and by the way, Ford truck sales are UP 13% from last year and Dodges are up 4% from last year, so Dodge isn't gaining on Ford, and they darn sure aren't takng any sales away.
For further HD truck applications, let's wait and see what Dodge does a month after the new SuperDuty is released. I bet they'll try their best to top it, they're like one of those guys on `The Price is Right` that bids one dollar more than you every time you bid, it'll be interesting to see how they try to rip Ford off this year.
By the way, sinister73, wha are the exact torque ratings of the two manual HD transmissions (Ford and Dodge), and also, what are the ratings of their automatics? I'm having a hard time finding them online.

 

Hold on, I need to stop the b/s before it gets too deep in here.

Facts:

#1 Dodges have very POOR resale value. It's been proven at dealers across the nation. It wouldn't matter what engine it had behind it, the truck just won't bring what you may think it's worth.

#2 Ford made engine changes to #1, meet government regulations, and #2 to IMPROVE on what was already there. Why rest when there is always room for improvement?? Obviously Dodge thought that there was no room for improvement until last year, which is way off base. Only thing they were concerned with changing before that was the body styles.

#3 It's been proven time and time again, that Dodge truck transmissions aren't worth their weight in scrap metal. They just do not hold up under any circumstances. Found that out first hand, and that so-called warranty they had was a joke. The arguement for their manuals is a load of crap, not very many people have the patience to drive one, especially in heavy traffic and stoplight areas. Oh almost forgot, ask a person who has arthritis what they think of a manual.

There is not much that I can say about the diesels, but until one of the 3 comes out with a Cat C7 or JD Power-Tech diesel, I won't be considering any of them. I don't want aluminum heads, I don't want bad programming, and I don't want a injector eater.

 

This great dodge resale value. Dodge guys never mention that do they. Have seen several Dodges at Ford dealers. Cant even get rid of the things.

 

WRONG. You are incorrect here.

Ford uses a Sterling 10.5" gear. The 10.25" hasn't been used since before the redesign in '99.

The only reason I could see how Dodge is ahead on anything is because they redesigned only last year. Ford has another 2 years before it will get a redesign.

Dodges have left us stranded too many times to consider them again.

 

Still, no reasoning of why a Dodge is such a piece of junk, except that the Ford F-150 slightly outclasses it. And you mentioned the sales numbers again, who cares. The 04 F-150 has nearly everything to do with the increase, and if you think otherwise, you are mistaken. Also, the heavy duty sales are probably not consistent with overall F-series sales.

Why wouldn't the Cummins last longer if it is built more heavily? Even if there are no facts to support that the Cummins rods are stronger, common sense might indicate that it is a possibility. Anyway, the 6.0 Powerstroke has not been proven, and the Cummins, although changed, has basically the same bottom end that it always has, which can last many many miles. The 7.3 PSD may have outpowered the Cummins for much of its life, but it would not last as long. I have heard from a diesel shop that the 7.3 PSD usually lasts around 250,000 miles, while the Cummins usually goes at least 350,000 miles. I know that a few PSDs have supposedly lasted 1,000,000 miles, but a few 5.9 Cummins also have. I realize that these are not "facts", but could be a explanation of why so many people say that the Cummins will last longer.

I also kind of doubt that the pilot injection was copied by Dodge from Ford. The 03 Dodge was available a month or so before the 6.0 PSD, if I remember right, and even considering that, it would take more than a few months to design it. Also the HO 2003 Dodge was more powerful than the 7.3 that was available until early 2003, so with all of the factors considered, it probably outclassed the 7.3 in every way.

 

Torque specs are 750 LBFT for the NV5600, 650 LBFT for the ZF -520? LBFT for gassers with the ZF 6 speed (apparantely the ZF uses an even smaller gear set for gas engines). Both transmissions are awesome units. If you are trying to come up with an achilles heel for this tranny - save your time. You will never turn the NV5600 into one of your instruments for bashing DC transmissions - this unit is extremely solid.
About the best arguement you would possibly have would be the shift pattern difference. The ZF's patter was alien to me - it's so different from that of the
previous 5 speed, it took some getting used to. BUT it is better for efficiency.

MJD, the F150 comes in two variations. Standard and HD model. The HD model has
either a 7700 or 8200 GVWR package. The MAJORITY of current 2004 F150's do not come with this option - and are thus outclassed by the Dodge Ram 1500. The Ram
achieves it rating with standard components which are extremely beefy for a half ton truck. The 04 F150 comes equipt with either much smaller standard half ton components or 3/4 ton components included with the increased GVWR package.
Ford initially sold trucks equipt like this as the light duty 250. They werent very hot sellers, so Ford dumped the line altogether, and instead offered the same truck as an optional 7700 GVWR package in the F150. How many 7700lb F150's do you really see?
How about light duty 250's? I've seen about a handful in the whole of the last 6 1/2 years. This will probably also be true of the 04 F150. Lariat's arguement only holds
true for probably less than 5% of all F150's sold. The rest have payload and towing capacities below what comes standard from Dodge.

Apparantely factory torque and HP is all that means anything to you Lariat - BUT ONLY
if Ford is the one in the lead. Neither number seems to mean anything to you when we start talking about the HEMI vs the 5.4L - at THAT POINT you want to start switching the conversation over to Rear Wheel HP/torque and drivetrain efficiency...lol. Guess what? The HEMI makes alot more stock for stock at BOTH wheels (flywheel and rear wheel Lariat...). Fast foward once again to the Cummins vs PSD debate - and your all over the numbers again....amazing.

Let me explain something for you - Ford is a numbers *****. This applies to all sorts of numbers. They will release paylod and towing numbers - only to re-release them within months just to out do a competitor - with absolutely no product change. HP is the same way- remember the Mustang Cobra fiasco? You don't think Ford did'int know any better do you? They knew alright - it was the numbers they wanted. Ford will practically give their trucks away to large fleets to get the best sales numbers possible. They make enough on private sales, that they can let large commercials sales go at cost. The only reason Ford has'int up'ed the ante (once again) already,
is because - unlike Cummins- they need to work on reliability first. I have no doubt that Cummins could really let this motor out to it's full rated capacity if they wanted to. Dodge would need another transmission - probably Eaton, and a different axle to hold it as well. All Cummins would need to do, is turn the ISBe up to it's maximum factory output - 840FTLB. Ford would be falling all over themselves looking for a new engine to compete - the 6.0 would go the way of the 6.9 7.3 and 7.3 PSD, it would soon be discontinued...lol.

Let me ask, -is'int this whole torque game getting to be a bit ridiculous to you? Apparentely not, since you keep citing Ford's "new and improved" numbers for this coming fall - but with Ford it's ALWAYS been about those damned numbers.

The 7.3 PSD was good. The 5.9L Cummins was always better. Everyone knows both these facts. Why is it so hard to understand the superiority of an inline engine for severe service work?
Nevermind - it's a brand thing. Afterall, most here will agree with me when I say the 300 I6 was an awesome truck motor for what it was. With much less displacement it could pull loads better than most small block V8's - had fewer parts, operated at fewer RPM, had better balance, and would last much longer than most. These facts are acceptable if we speak of the 300 - but not the Cummins?

The 3162 Cat is has a displacement of 7.2 liters. It's an inline - like the Cummins.
Both have the same characteristics of inline engines-massive, well balanced internals.
Being the larger engine, the Cats internals will naturally be the larger of the two.
Both are plenty large enough for their design purposes.
Both will go many hundreds of thousands of miles in an average lifetime.
Both have great low RPM torque relative to most V8 designs - more torque/same RPM.
All this said - the Cat will definately out perform the Cummins for both GVWR and GCWR
The 7.3 V8 PSD - with an even larger displacement advantage cannot - why?
The 6.0 - even as the VT-365 still has a slight advantage in displacement - but is
not up to the 5.9L Cummins performance in commercial applications - why?

I like V8's and V10's just fine. Big blocks are great pullers. Small blocks can be too-I'm impressed with the Hemi myself. But as a rule, inlines offer less complication, better low RPM performance, better fuel efficiency, and larger/better balanced internals - this last factor being more important in high compression diesel applications.

 

Hey sinister73 As usual another great post from you. Ive learned more about trucks in the last few weeks from you than I knew existed. Your very knowledgeable and common sense I like that. Keep up the good work. Thanks

 

Thank you for the compliment 150Ford. You are a true gentleman. It must not have been very easy for you to do that considering how I slammed Ford so hard in my last post. My apologies to all who may take exception to my previous demeanor. Being this is a Ford site, I usually take the slamming and roll with the punches, then I just state my facts. But when dealing with someone so consistently brand biased as Lariat, sometimes you let both barrels go. Most of those accusations in his last post are blatant lies. These get mixed in with some good ole half truths, and misleading comparisions.

I know I'm not always right either, but I have no doubts that my posts are
as fair as I can possibly make them - since I don't go into these debates with any brand bias. Maybe I am a bit biased toward Cummins - Lariat even admits he is toward Ford. This comes from actual user experience however. I have also had good experience with Dodge trucks - both first and second generation trucks. The difference is - I don't let my good experiences with one brand run wild on another. In other words, I'd never be the guy to say
a 7.3L is an outright outdated POS just cause I think the Cummins is a better
motor which is still in production, while the 7.3 has been discontinued.

You are correct MW95F250 - the Super Duty does use a 10.5" visteon rear axle with 10,500lb capacity across the board. While I was checking this, I came upon some different front axle information for both 4x2 and 4x4 Super Duty trucks. It seems both trucks have more maximum axle capacity than I originally stated. 4850lbs is the maximum for 4x2's and 5200lbs (same as Dodge) for 4x4's. It turns out the lesser ratings are for trucks which arent equipt with the "max front GAWR package". These lesser ratings get standard springs, and the springs being the weak link reduce the GAWR accordingly.

So a more accurate conclusion would be;

Highest standard front GAWR (4x2/4x4) = Dodge
Highest max front GAWR (4x2) = Ford.
Highest max front GAWR (4x4) = Same

With the exception of the correction regarding the Visteon 10.5" axle and
it's ground rating, the rear axle specs for both trucks remain the same.
There can be no doubt that the Dodge diesel uses a much larger rear axle.

There will be many changes to the new Super Duty when it comes out Lariat.
Besides engine inprovements, coil spring front suspension on 4x4's, interior changes, updated body work, and a rumored hydroformed boxed frame, GVWR's and GCWR's are supposed to go up. I see the latter improvement as having more impact with DRW trucks. I do not see the possibility of improving much with SRW models in this regard - tire capacity being the limiting factor.
Even in 04 model duallies, there must be other factors such as brakes, bearings, ring and pinion, springs, or axle shaft torque capacity which limit the rear GAWR - since the combined tire weight rating of all four tires easily exceeds the maximum axle weight rating on these trucks. In SRW trucks it's quite the opposite - usually everything else is already a higher capacity component being limited by the tires. Stronger frame, bigger axle, bigger brakes, and stiffer springs will = greater GVWR and payload for a dually.

GCWR may go up for the SRW models, but not necessarily pin weight or payload ratings - at least not without putting the truck on a severe diet while keeping the current GVWR - bad idea IMO. Either that or increase the GVWR, but how they intend to do that on a SRW without going to commercial 19.5" rims I don't know-the new rim size is supposed to be 18" BTW - I guess to get one up on Dodge by being a bit bigger - should have gotten one up on them the right way and gone straight to 19.5 if you ask me..then Dodge might have had to play "catch up" as you inferred. Not now.

Competition is good as long as you are able to take advantage of it. Brand biased people only see improvements when their particular brand gets around to it. Guys like me can take advantage of the best products available because there simply is no bias. It's so wonderful to know that if I chose diesel in my next rig, that I can have the best one going. It's equally satisfying to note that if I choose to go with a gasser, I've got the
option of a 3 valve V10 coming out soon. I cannot even rule out the possibility of a GMC with possibly 6.0 or 8.1 gassers - though the Super
Duty would probably get the nod - depending on the deals available to me.
Choice is wonderful. Good thing I have had good experiences with all three.
I know all of them will hold up to most any use I'd have - except maybe plowing with an IFS GMC 4x4 - I'd be leary of that since I have no
experience with them in that capacity.

Ford makes an awesome looking truck - the best looking actually IMO. Sometimes my opinions change, but I've always regarded it's looks rather highly. The Chevy looks terrible, but the GMC has a nice understated appearance - like the trucks of yesteryear. The Ram has never looked
better than it does now. Still the Super Duty has just the right combination of size and aesthetics. I know you know what I am talking about. It just feels right - it's got the roomiest interior of them all, and has that massive brutish feeling. To Ford's credit, I also think they have the thickest sheet metal, and extremely tight body work. The fact is however - there's much more to a truck than appearances. Depending on what's under the hood and what's in the Chassis, along with what it's being compared to - sometimes the
Super Duty is the better truck - and sometimes not.

And those are all the facts I'll ever need.

 

Torque specs are 750 LBFT for the NV5600, 650 LBFT for the ZF -520? LBFT for gassers with the ZF 6 speed (apparantely the ZF uses an even smaller gear set for gas engines). Both transmissions are awesome units. If you are trying to come up with an achilles heel for this tranny - save your time. You will never turn the NV5600 into one of your instruments for bashing DC transmissions - this unit is extremely solid.
About the best arguement you would possibly have would be the shift pattern difference. The ZF's patter was alien to me - it's so different from that of the
previous 5 speed, it took some getting used to. BUT it is better for efficiency.
--------------------
Not looking for an achilles heel, that tranny will give us one on it's own, just looking for facts. What are the automatics rated?
--------------------

MJD, the F150 comes in two variations. Standard and HD model. The HD model has
either a 7700 or 8200 GVWR package. The MAJORITY of current 2004 F150's do not come with this option - and are thus outclassed by the Dodge Ram 1500. The Ram
achieves it rating with standard components which are extremely beefy for a half ton truck. The 04 F150 comes equipt with either much smaller standard half ton components or 3/4 ton components included with the increased GVWR package.
Ford initially sold trucks equipt like this as the light duty 250. They werent very hot sellers, so Ford dumped the line altogether, and instead offered the same truck as an optional 7700 GVWR package in the F150. How many 7700lb F150's do you really see?
How about light duty 250's? I've seen about a handful in the whole of the last 6 1/2 years. This will probably also be true of the 04 F150. Lariat's arguement only holds
true for probably less than 5% of all F150's sold. The rest have payload and towing capacities below what comes standard from Dodge.
-------------------
Again, because Dodge doesn't offer anything close to performing like the Ford does. BTW, I have seen quite a few with the upgraded package, so what you see doesn't represent the entire market. Fact is and still remains the FACT. Ford offers this in a half ton, nobody else does. Sure, someone else may beat them in base models, but if you want more, you buy more, that's how it works. You can buy more with a Ford.
-------------------


Apparantely factory torque and HP is all that means anything to you Lariat - BUT ONLY
if Ford is the one in the lead. Neither number seems to mean anything to you when we start talking about the HEMI vs the 5.4L - at THAT POINT you want to start switching the conversation over to Rear Wheel HP/torque and drivetrain efficiency...lol. Guess what? The HEMI makes alot more stock for stock at BOTH wheels (flywheel and rear wheel Lariat...). Fast foward once again to the Cummins vs PSD debate - and your all over the numbers again....amazing.
------------------------
No, I am interested in rw power ratings always, but 1/2 tons are not in the same catergory as 3/4 or 1 tons, so the same things aren't as important. There are completely different factors when debating gassers and diesels. Bottom line, what your engine makes doesn't mean squat if the rest of the truck can't perform enough to back it up, this is why the half ton market is ruled by Ford. Hemi makes more power (even at the rear wheels), but the Ford tows more and hauls more. Period. That kind of makes the power irrelevant. Now, I even admitted that currently, the Dodge may be a stronger truck (overlooking dependability and durability issues), but that is only until this fall, and only for this year. Never before, and never again.

 

bottom line......ford ....no good. period. shooting park plugs etc....plus just look at them Dodge is a great looking truck.. I should have never traded in my Dodge...man that was a fast and good looning truck. It also could pull my trailor with no problem. You guys should go look at them. They are easy to work on them too....
Have good day.

 

Let me explain something for you - Ford is a numbers *****. This applies to all sorts of numbers. They will release paylod and towing numbers - only to re-release them within months just to out do a competitor - with absolutely no product change. HP is the same way- remember the Mustang Cobra fiasco? You don't think Ford did'int know any better do you? They knew alright - it was the numbers they wanted. Ford will practically give their trucks away to large fleets to get the best sales numbers possible. They make enough on private sales, that they can let large commercials sales go at cost. The only reason Ford has'int up'ed the ante (once again) already,
is because - unlike Cummins- they need to work on reliability first. I have no doubt that Cummins could really let this motor out to it's full rated capacity if they wanted to. Dodge would need another transmission - probably Eaton, and a different axle to hold it as well. All Cummins would need to do, is turn the ISBe up to it's maximum factory output - 840FTLB. Ford would be falling all over themselves looking for a new engine to compete - the 6.0 would go the way of the 6.9 7.3 and 7.3 PSD, it would soon be discontinued...lol.
--------------
Letme explain something to you, this is a business. Making trucks is a business that companies make money on. If you want to go on believing that Ford lies and is evil and doesn't care about their customers but Dodge doesn't lie, is good and does care about their customers, then go on believing that, but send me some of what you are smoking, because what we have here isn't anywhere near that strong. If one company lies (which they really can't do, consumers are much smarter in today's market than ever before), then they all do. No way can you say that Dodge doesn't do the same thing Ford does, because they are TRYING TO CATCH FORD IN SALES. That's right, believe it or not, Dodge isn't the leader, and they want to make money, so they look at who HAS made the money in this business, and they follow. Believe anything else you want, but like I said, send me what you are smoking.
---------------

Let me ask, -is'int this whole torque game getting to be a bit ridiculous to you? Apparentely not, since you keep citing Ford's "new and improved" numbers for this coming fall - but with Ford it's ALWAYS been about those damned numbers.
---------------------
No, I like the torque race in the diesels.
----------------------

The 7.3 PSD was good. The 5.9L Cummins was always better. Everyone knows both these facts. Why is it so hard to understand the superiority of an inline engine for severe service work?
Nevermind - it's a brand thing. Afterall, most here will agree with me when I say the 300 I6 was an awesome truck motor for what it was. With much less displacement it could pull loads better than most small block V8's - had fewer parts, operated at fewer RPM, had better balance, and would last much longer than most. These facts are acceptable if we speak of the 300 - but not the Cummins?
-----------------
What `fact` states that the Cummins was always better? Did it ever have more power? Did it ever outsell? Was it proven (not by what you have seen, PROVEN) to last longer? I don't think so. Inline 6 cylinders are a good application, but just because an engine is an inline 6 doesn't mean it's the best thing on the market. Everyone would agree that if the 300 had crappy internals, it would have been a crappy engine. Basic idea on paper doesn't always translate into a better engine. I haven't seen the Cummins do anything special that anyone else hasn't been able to do because it was an inline 6.
-------------------------------

The 3162 Cat is has a displacement of 7.2 liters. It's an inline - like the Cummins.
Both have the same characteristics of inline engines-massive, well balanced internals.
Being the larger engine, the Cats internals will naturally be the larger of the two.
Both are plenty large enough for their design purposes.
Both will go many hundreds of thousands of miles in an average lifetime.
Both have great low RPM torque relative to most V8 designs - more torque/same RPM.
All this said - the Cat will definately out perform the Cummins for both GVWR and GCWR
The 7.3 V8 PSD - with an even larger displacement advantage cannot - why?
The 6.0 - even as the VT-365 still has a slight advantage in displacement - but is
not up to the 5.9L Cummins performance in commercial applications - why?
---------------------
Emissions. The Cummins is a medium duty diesel, the PSD is a light duty. The 6.0 was made to meet (or be easily upgraded to meet) the 2007 standards for emissions requirements, just staying ahead of what they will have to meet. The Cummins hasn't had to deal with this.
----------------------


I like V8's and V10's just fine. Big blocks are great pullers. Small blocks can be too-I'm impressed with the Hemi myself. But as a rule, inlines offer less complication, better low RPM performance, better fuel efficiency, and larger/better balanced internals - this last factor being more important in high compression diesel applications.
-------------------------------
As a rule? Depends on what these engines are built out of. I have never heard of a Cummins making it out of warranty without having to take it back for warranty work. Again, this is what I have seen, but I bet that it has a lot to do with Dodge's sorry repeat buyer rate. I've never seen a guy with a broke down truck saying `Man, if I had better balanced internals, this would have never happened!` lol
Also, larger internals don't equal more strength, either. Seems that way, but it ain't. Give me some strength ratings before you pass something as a fact when it isn't.

 

You didn't even wait until the next post to contradict yourself that time, you brand-biased man!