ShinerBock wrote:
Exactly! there is just not enough of a monetary benefit for most half ton truck owners for that they will have to give up. I don't think I am alone in saying that I would not give up 135 more horsepower and better performance for a monthly savings of less than half of what it takes me to fill up a 26 gallon fuel tank.
Although if you look at it in another way, I have paid thousands just to add 100 hp in my vehicles so paying an extra $250-350 a year for another 135 hp and 50 lb-ft is actually a dang good deal.
This is RV.net. Take that into consideration. Most half ton owners do nothing but commute and drive back and forth from the store. What possible reason does one have to need 135 more horsepower when it's costing them extra money (somewhere between $303 and $565 a year-a whole months truck payment for some is in that range)?
Now for performance, that is an opinion again. Good for you, you made it up the hill faster than me by a whole minute, but you also got 2-mpg at that time. That is not good performance in my mind.
As far as I'm concerned, you have no historical data on the subject. The one fact you reported was about a newly introduced truck in the very first year.
