Jun-17-2013 09:02 AM
Jun-19-2013 03:57 PM
Jun-19-2013 08:50 AM
Buck50HD wrote:N-Trouble wrote:Taco wrote:
in 2013 the top gas half tons pulling 8500 went 0-40 in around 12 seconds. in 2010 in the heavyduty SHOOTOUT the ford 6.7 powerstroke and CTD went 0-40 in 16 seconds towing 10k lbs. So a half ton handles power wise 8500 better than a diesel handles 10k. I would even go so far as to say the half tons have a decent shot of beating the diesels with 10k giving how big of an advantage they showed with only 1500 less lbs.
Take that same load up a 7% grade, or into a 30MPH headwind and then ask yourself whether the gas or diesel is better suited power wise... Towing ability is not all about acceleration. I take it you've never driven a current 3/4 ton diesel otherwise you would have not have made such an outlandish statement.
OK, we get it, it's diesel or nothing...
Jun-19-2013 08:47 AM
Taco wrote:N-Trouble wrote:
Take that same load up a 7% grade, or into a 30MPH headwind and then ask yourself whether the gas or diesel is better suited power wise... Towing ability is not all about acceleration. I take it you've never driven a current 3/4 ton diesel otherwise you would have not have made such an outlandish statement.
both of those times were on a 7.2% grade at gm's proving grounds
Jun-18-2013 07:41 PM
Jun-18-2013 06:54 PM
Turtle n Peeps wrote:manley wrote:
I'm sorry, but I'm not buying these results. There's just way too much inconsistency in my opinion. Here's just a couple of the problems that I have:
1. GMC & Chevrolet - the results are WAY too different.
2. The Ram in 1st place? With a 1,000 pound payload? Seriously?
3. Look at the new 5.3 specifications... and tell me that the loaded / towing numbers can POSSIBLY be correct.
X2, the numbers are suspect for me too.
Jun-18-2013 06:52 PM
Jun-18-2013 04:05 PM
N-Trouble wrote:Taco wrote:
in 2013 the top gas half tons pulling 8500 went 0-40 in around 12 seconds. in 2010 in the heavyduty SHOOTOUT the ford 6.7 powerstroke and CTD went 0-40 in 16 seconds towing 10k lbs. So a half ton handles power wise 8500 better than a diesel handles 10k. I would even go so far as to say the half tons have a decent shot of beating the diesels with 10k giving how big of an advantage they showed with only 1500 less lbs.
Take that same load up a 7% grade, or into a 30MPH headwind and then ask yourself whether the gas or diesel is better suited power wise... Towing ability is not all about acceleration. I take it you've never driven a current 3/4 ton diesel otherwise you would have not have made such an outlandish statement.
Jun-18-2013 04:02 PM
N-Trouble wrote:
Take that same load up a 7% grade, or into a 30MPH headwind and then ask yourself whether the gas or diesel is better suited power wise... Towing ability is not all about acceleration. I take it you've never driven a current 3/4 ton diesel otherwise you would have not have made such an outlandish statement.
Jun-18-2013 02:23 PM
Taco wrote:
in 2013 the top gas half tons pulling 8500 went 0-40 in around 12 seconds. in 2010 in the heavyduty SHOOTOUT the ford 6.7 powerstroke and CTD went 0-40 in 16 seconds towing 10k lbs. So a half ton handles power wise 8500 better than a diesel handles 10k. I would even go so far as to say the half tons have a decent shot of beating the diesels with 10k giving how big of an advantage they showed with only 1500 less lbs.
Jun-18-2013 07:32 AM
manley wrote:
I'm sorry, but I'm not buying these results. There's just way too much inconsistency in my opinion. Here's just a couple of the problems that I have:
1. GMC & Chevrolet - the results are WAY too different.
2. The Ram in 1st place? With a 1,000 pound payload? Seriously?
3. Look at the new 5.3 specifications... and tell me that the loaded / towing numbers can POSSIBLY be correct.
Jun-18-2013 06:47 AM
Jun-18-2013 06:33 AM
Dadoffourgirls wrote:
The GM twins appear to be superior to the Ecoburst in fuel economy - towing and non-towing. And for the less than 1 second, appears to pull as well. I guess they were telling the truth when they said they would have a truck with better fuel economy then the ecoboost.
Jun-18-2013 06:30 AM
Jun-18-2013 06:04 AM
manley wrote:
I'm sorry, but I'm not buying these results. There's just way too much inconsistency in my opinion. Here's just a couple of the problems that I have:
1. GMC & Chevrolet - the results are WAY too different.
2. The Ram in 1st place? With a 1,000 pound payload? Seriously?
3. Look at the new 5.3 specifications... and tell me that the loaded / towing numbers can POSSIBLY be correct.
Jun-18-2013 05:27 AM