Forum Discussion
Bionic Man wrote:
IMO, the "no-man's land" (or "gap" as dshelly called it) is what fuels a lot of gas vs. big-bore diesel threads.dshelley wrote:
I would say that it is falling into no-man's land.
Looks like it will do what it was designed for. To fill a gap between the light duty half tons and the heavy duty 2500/3500's I like it. I like it a lot.
Engine is not powerful enough to offer a substantial power advantage over the 3.5 EB or Hemi (or the Chevy equivalent).
And it is not significantly more efficient than those above mentioned options either, so no big advantage in MPG.
I hope it is a winner for them. But I think they have a tough row to hoe.
I think many will disagree with your assessment of the Cummins V8 5.0 diesel/torque/MPG experience. Rather doubt the 3.5EB, Hemi/Tundra 5.7, 6.2, 6.4, etc. are going to even come close in a realworld 10,000 lb. tow battle.
Although it may not be appealing to your needs, IMO Nissan has found a market path of least resistance . This path leads directly to a number of prospective and current 1/2 ton owners who want the diesel experience, but don't want to make the jump to a big-bore diesel.
For those that expect the Nissan Titan Cummins to be priced lower than a 3/4 ton big-bore diesel--not going to happen. IMO, it'll be "competitively" priced around $45k-$55k. Same price range as the best-selling 1/2 tons and lower trim-line 3/4 ton big-bore diesels.
Why would anyone buy a Nissan XD Titan Cummins for $45k-$55k when they could buy a 3/4 ton big-bore diesel? I'll answer it by posing another question. Why do so many spend $45k-$55k on the best-selling 1/2 ton trucks?- It will be interesting to watch. I saw the RealMPG testing as well with the 2 RAMs as a baseline. Interesting to see they get 17.4 mpg on the highway when that's what I get combined on Winter diesel (I typically get 18.x during the summer). My highway fuel economy tends to be around 22 or 23 mpg with my experience (all hand calc of course).
But yeah, the weight surprises me. My truck weighs about 7760 pounds when subtracting passenger weight. This is with 3/4 tank of diesel and 1/2 tank of DEF. That is a bonafied HD chassis with that kind of weight, unless they're using really poor metallurgy which I doubt. Bionic Man wrote:
dshelley wrote:
Looks like it will do what it was designed for. To fill a gap between the light duty half tons and the heavy duty 2500/3500's I like it. I like it a lot.
I would say that it is falling into no-man's land.
Engine is not powerful enough to offer a substantial power advantage over the 3.5 EB or Hemi (or the Chevy equivalent).
And it is not significantly more efficient than those above mentioned options either, so no big advantage in MPG.
I hope it is a winner for them. But I think they have a tough row to hoe.
I completely agree.IdaD wrote:
Me Again wrote:
The very complex diesel would be a show stopped for me along with the CP4.2 injection pump. Chris
The chains and the injection pump would give me pause too. Plus I'm having a hard time coming up with an advantage with this truck compared to a regular heavy duty model. It isn't any cheaper and barely gets better mileage.
Percentage-wise it might get 15-20% better mileage hwy (according to MT's test), but we'll never really know as there's no real standard for HD trucks.
It's ride *might* be better, but the RAM 2500 sets a pretty high standard there. And the payload is still in question.
As for price, that's so variable depending upon regional discounts that there's no way to tell. I know locally you can't beat Ford's Superduties price-wise because of one high volume dealer. RAMs and GMCs don't come close unless you know somebody.
No idea how this thing will compare price wise. But if it can be had for 4-5 CanGrand less than a similarly equipped Ford F250 diesel, I'm interested.
A lot more info should be coming out soon. Apparently there's an embargo on journalist's reporting stuff until Nov 15th. TFLTruck.com and PickupTrucks.com should have some reviews soon.Me Again wrote:
The very complex diesel would be a show stopped for me along with the CP4.2 injection pump. Chris
The chains and the injection pump would give me pause too. Plus I'm having a hard time coming up with an advantage with this truck compared to a regular heavy duty model. It isn't any cheaper and barely gets better mileage.- The very complex diesel would be a show stopped for me along with the CP4.2 injection pump. Chris
- I like it a lot too, but not with a $63k price tag and not unless it can get good mpg around town and also at a steady 60 mph. Just getting a couple mpg better then what any of the Big 3 duallys get for about the same money won't fly.
dshelley wrote:
Looks like it will do what it was designed for. To fill a gap between the light duty half tons and the heavy duty 2500/3500's I like it. I like it a lot.
I would say that it is falling into no-man's land.
Engine is not powerful enough to offer a substantial power advantage over the 3.5 EB or Hemi (or the Chevy equivalent).
And it is not significantly more efficient than those above mentioned options either, so no big advantage in MPG.
I hope it is a winner for them. But I think they have a tough row to hoe.- Looks like it will do what it was designed for. To fill a gap between the light duty half tons and the heavy duty 2500/3500's I like it. I like it a lot.
IdaD wrote:
...
I noticed in the photos it only has 6 lug wheels. I wondered if it might have 8.
Don't think so. Not full-float axles either. Otherwise the drive train is appears pretty hefty, to handle the Cummins torque but not for high payloads, I guess. The chassis is also substantial, modified from the NV 3/4-1 ton vans.
