When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
What about fuel economy? It sounds like Ford makes a more solid truck but averages 15 to 18 mpg. I'v heard claims of over 25 mpg from cummins guys. Can anyone back this up?
25mpg might be possible with the 1st generation 12v (89-93), if properly set up. Most of the bonfided cases of that kind of MPG with a Cummins are the 1st generation trucks, with the rotary injector pumps. The later more powerfull versions can get around 20, empty, with the injector pump properly set up. My 97 ton has got as good as 19mpg-empty. It gets 13-14 pulling. The 06 PSD F350 six speed, typically get's about 2 mpg better fuel economy than the 03 Dodge Cummins 3500 six speed it replaced; doing the same things. Usually it takes a chip or a programer to get ~20+mpg out of the newer electronic Dodge Cummins. 3/4 tons usually do better than tons because of the injector timing specs.
One thing I forgot to mention was brakes. It's been my experiance that Fords usually have superior brakes compared to comparable Dodges.
I am the "he" that started this thread. Of the duramax trucks I've seen (and I don't look long) they aren't good looking at all.. .
I think this a wise stance to take, as it involves more than just the looks. The dmax guys are always claiming that the dmax has never really had any serious problems. This just isn't the case. I know of cases of blown engines: specifically broken rods, spun bearings, burnt pistons, and other types of catastrophic bottom-end failure. In June of 06, they reduced the compression ratio and quietly introduced a more beefed up block. There's a reason. There has been reports of head gasket problems as well. Talking to an experianced diesel expert revealed that he has seen a lot of problems involving the aluminum heads.
25mpg might be possible with the 1st generation 12v (89-93), if properly set up. Most of the bonfided cases of that kind of MPG with a Cummins are the 1st generation trucks, with the rotary injector pumps. The later more powerfull versions can get around 20, empty, with the injector pump properly set up. My 97 ton has got as good as 19mpg-empty. It gets 13-14 pulling. The 06 PSD F350 six speed, typically get's about 2 mpg better fuel economy than the 03 Dodge Cummins 3500 six speed it replaced; doing the same things. Usually it takes a chip or a programer to get ~20+mpg out of the newer electronic Dodge Cummins. 3/4 tons usually do better than tons because of the injector timing specs.
One thing I forgot to mention was brakes. It's been my experiance that Fords usually have superior brakes compared to comparable Dodges.
One thing I forgot to mention was brakes. It's been my experiance that Fords usually have superior brakes compared to comparable Dodges.
This is true of any full size Dodge vs. full size Ford. F150-f450, Ram 1500-Ram 3500. However, Dodge wins on the smaller trucks. Every person I've known with a Ranger eats brakes, where as a buddy of mine who is pretty tough on his Dakota brakes doesn't. Interesting I think.
dont know what ur talking about the ranger eating brakes. my little daily driver ranger stops on a dime and goes just as long as any other car or truck when it comes to brakes
This thread kinda' went awry.
As I said before, I've got a PSD and a CTD. However, thery're not comparable because of the age (generation) difference. The Cummins 5.9L is one of the most reliable engines produced. It can also make some serious torque with not a whole lot of mods. The PSD 7.3L is just as reliable in light and medium duty applications. Again, serious power without a lot of cost. However get into the newer CARB compliant stuff, and you're gunna see some difficulties from Ford, Dodge and Chev.
If the larger consideration is the truck (not just the engine) Dodge is not the answer.
I think the 5.9L is a good motor,I thought that motor would run like a striped a__ _ape,,,but it was all the other things on the Dodge that seemed to go bump in the night.
If you want to make one or two drag runs with the PSD, go for it.
That engine really has get up and go.
Long pulls with a heavy trailer?
That 6.0L has head gasket problems.
I suspect the head bolts but have not proved it yet.
The test lab will give me the answers I need.
See TSB's on 6.0L diesel.
Love the truck, but the ABS system and engine related problems make me think that Ford and I are about to get divorced after these 55+ years.
I need an engine that doesn't require nearly the shop time mine has needed.
I don't make money sitting here on the computer.
Hope I save somone some heartache.
I am now looking at my neighbors 3 Dodges with envy. He has yet to break down.
Last edited by JohnMinn; Aug 20, 2007 at 05:14 PM.
Reason: Missed comment
This thread kinda' went awry.
Again, serious power without a lot of cost. However get into the newer CARB compliant stuff, and you're gunna see some difficulties from Ford, Dodge and Chev.
I wonder how many difficulties are going to come about using Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel?
I had a Ford lot salesman tell me about the Chevy aluminum heads. I thought he didn't know what he was talking about. What where they thinking?
That's just something that's become an urban legend. There are far less head sealing issues with a dmax than the 6.0. I spent close to 2 years on a GM/Dmax forum and that's just one complaint you rarely saw. Those aluminum heads have turned out fine, and hold a pretty fair amount of tuning to boot...
There are a ton of reasons besides the motor that I wouldn't own another dmax tho...
Boy, the guys on that Cummins forum sure have a thing against Ford! Maybe because they sell fewer than half as many Dodges as Ford sells F series? Inferiority complex maybe?
The Cummins is a great motor (or was before the 6.7, we'll see...) probably the only reason Daimler found a buyer for Chrysler was because of the engine contract with Cummins and Jeep. Wish Ford had gotten Cummins instead of Navistar (although my 7.3 was great), but there is no comparison when looking at the overall product. Here's my question to the Dodge fanatics - if the Cummins is soooo great, why isn't the Dodge rated to tow or carry as much as a comparable Ford?
Boy, the guys on that Cummins forum sure have a thing against Ford! Maybe because they sell fewer than half as many Dodges as Ford sells F series? Inferiority complex maybe?
The Cummins is a great motor (or was before the 6.7, we'll see...) probably the only reason Daimler found a buyer for Chrysler was because of the engine contract with Cummins and Jeep. Wish Ford had gotten Cummins instead of Navistar (although my 7.3 was great), but there is no comparison when looking at the overall product. Here's my question to the Dodge fanatics - if the Cummins is soooo great, why isn't the Dodge rated to tow or carry as much as a comparable Ford?
While I think Chevy is still where they've been capacity-wise for a while, my understanding is the 6.7 Dodges (late '07s) have upped their capacity. Had a friend shopping for a SRW 1 ton and I told him Ford had the most capacity in that configuration, he came back after a visit to the Dodge dealer and said Dodge now has an 11,500# gvwr rating for a SRW 1 ton. I checked online and it's true... FWIW, I think the OP of this thread isn't considering a new truck anyway...
I envy you guys driving the fords. I have a new dodge with the new 6.7 cummins. 32 ft float with 22 bales i can squeeze about 47 mph at about 8mpg. im not the only one with that problem out of this motor either. im stuck with this expensive heap too. i get better out of an old 97 f250 psd my wife drives. 250,000 miles. itll usually go about 63 or so with 19 on it. i wanna cry. take my advice, i dont know about the 6.4 psd but the new cummins is not so great. 6.0 psd is alot better as buddies pass me loaded down and make fun.
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalytic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Slideshow: Called the Fortress, the 850-horsepower pickup combines Raptor underpinnings with military-inspired features, survival equipment, and a starting price of $285,000.