Cummins does something right
Thread Starter
|
Junior User
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Posting Guru
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,079
Likes: 0
No really? Who cares? They all had to do that to make what is known as the tier requirements for offroad and then whatever the new onroad requirements are. Right now, I think Cat is ahead of Cummins in that area. Every diesel manufacture should have gotten the award. Of all people, why did the CEO get the award? The engineers do all the work! Like the engineers couldn't have done it without the CEO? 
I hate it when the big wigs get all the credit.
I hate it when the big wigs get all the credit.
Senior User
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
I am having trouble understanding the title of this thread. You make it sound like Cummins has never done anything right. Do me a favor and scroll to the Cummins VS PSD thread that I started a while ago and look at the thred. Here on a Ford truck site, the Cummins engine is prefered over Ford's own offering. It looks like Cummins has been doing things right for a while. It has a reputation of being durable, and long lasting. And at the same time could tow anything you can throw at it, barely breaking a sweat.
Wake up and smell the coffee. Cummins has been building a solid diesel for a long, long time. When exactly did they go wrong?
Best regards.
Wake up and smell the coffee. Cummins has been building a solid diesel for a long, long time. When exactly did they go wrong?
Best regards.
Thread Starter
|
Junior User
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Sorry I lead you to believe I didn't like Cummins. I was being factious. It is just some of the arguments leveled against Cummins in recent threads on this sight were such that I named my thread that way.
FTE Leadership Emeritus
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 161,999
Likes: 75
From: 3rd Rock
some of the arguments leveled against Cummins in recent threads on this sight were such that I named my thread that way.
I own and drive daily a 1998 24 valve Cummins with 120,000 trouble free miles.
I own and drive daily a 1998 24 valve Cummins with 120,000 trouble free miles.
Curious do you own a Ford truck?
...and what brought you to FTE.....?
Trending Topics
Thread Starter
|
Junior User
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
I was in the market for a new truck and have always owned Fords or Dodges and I wanted to see what the current thinking was.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
2027 Super Duty Carhartt Package First Look: 12 Things You NEED to Know!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Most Surprising 2026 Ford Truck Features!
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 Ford Trucks Coming to Mecum Indy 2026
Brett Foote
5 Best / 5 Worst Ford Truck Wheels of All Time
Joe Kucinski
FTE Leadership Emeritus
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 161,999
Likes: 75
From: 3rd Rock
OK I'll bite, then why if…. your own words “in the market” would you come in touting the Cummins...IMO if you wanted a truly fare opinion of the market, I would not have started in the Ford vs. the Competition.....hum...strange way to research the market.
Your methodology to discovery is different...albeit not wrong just different.
and you typed WAS...does that mean you have made your choice...curious again I am
Your methodology to discovery is different...albeit not wrong just different.
and you typed WAS...does that mean you have made your choice...curious again I am
Thread Starter
|
Junior User
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Was - until my wife spent ~ $20,000 on a kitchen remodeling job. I was split between a 2005 3500 SRW w/Cummins or a 2005 350 SRW w/6.0. Leary of 6.0 because of early problems and was cruzing the web to find out more. Discussions about Cummins vs 6.0 are/were at the heart of the matter in my decison in buying a truck.
Irrational attacks on either engine can be found all over the net - so I thought I would post something about how well one was regaurded by the press. Not that Navstar isn't on top of the emission issues but they did have to resort to EGR before Cummins. EGR, while not proven to be bad, is typicaly looked at with suspicion by many owners.
Irrational attacks on either engine can be found all over the net - so I thought I would post something about how well one was regaurded by the press. Not that Navstar isn't on top of the emission issues but they did have to resort to EGR before Cummins. EGR, while not proven to be bad, is typicaly looked at with suspicion by many owners.
Senior User
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
If you take a look at the sales, and percenatges of HD Rams with Cummins engines in them you will see that neither Cummins or Dodge went wrong when they first dropped the 5.9 into the Rams in 89.
Best as always.
Best as always.
Last edited by Fordlover55; Apr 10, 2005 at 03:09 PM. Reason: removed comment about above post before editing
Posting Guru
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 1
From: pound
*First sentence removed, as unnecessary, after editing two posts above - FL55*
It would have been a MUCH smarter business move to go with either one of the big three except Dodge. Especially from a business standpoint, they would have sold hundreds of times many more trucks by now if they had gone with either GM or Ford, and you can't overlook that.
It would have been a MUCH smarter business move to go with either one of the big three except Dodge. Especially from a business standpoint, they would have sold hundreds of times many more trucks by now if they had gone with either GM or Ford, and you can't overlook that.
Last edited by Fordlover55; Apr 10, 2005 at 03:10 PM. Reason: see edit note in post
Senior User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Company name: Cummins Inc.
Corporate Headquarters: Columbus, Indiana
2004 revenues: $8.4 billion
2004 net income: $350 million
These are fishy financial numbers. 8.4 Billion in revenues while net income is only a small fraction. I think they are using funny calculators.
Corporate Headquarters: Columbus, Indiana
2004 revenues: $8.4 billion
2004 net income: $350 million
These are fishy financial numbers. 8.4 Billion in revenues while net income is only a small fraction. I think they are using funny calculators.