โFeb-06-2023 05:23 AM
โFeb-11-2023 07:30 AM
Huntindog wrote:Groover wrote:Oh Snap.I post something good and crazy gets the credit!
As StirCrazy said "There is more than the cost to measure value. Being able to increase range by 25% is worth something."
Not having to stop as often or worrying about giving out of fuel is nice. In virtually every discussion here about electric vehicles range is a key item. While it is less of an issue with diesels it is still an item.
If you are satisfied with your current range then you could carry 20% less fuel and increase your payload by 70lbs in a Superduty with the 48 gallon tank, or a 120lbs in my class A. Less time at the pump when you stop would be nice as well. Or don't use the extra weight capacity and have better performance.
A similar savings in DEF was reported. That is also worth time, weight and money. It is really amazing to me how some people blow off savings. It is almost like they are proud of how much they spend.
OP, huntindog.:B
"Being able to increase range by 25% is worth something."
โFeb-11-2023 06:50 AM
MFL wrote:Grit dog wrote:
We now need to see pics of the Cummins ladyโฆ.whoโs with me?
I am!! If 12V's still having w-dreams after 7 years has passed, she's got to be sumptin!
My Ford dealer is also a Ram dealer, so easy for me to make the switch! I may be willing to give her a full 24 hrs to convince me.
Jerry
โFeb-11-2023 06:25 AM
Grit dog wrote:
We now need to see pics of the Cummins ladyโฆ.whoโs with me?
โFeb-10-2023 12:40 PM
FishOnOne wrote:Cummins12V98 wrote:FishOnOne wrote:
Diesel's are due for a major break thru in technology that reduces the need or better yet eliminates the band-aid emissions equipment.
You mean like the Lady at Cummins that spoke of them working on such a system?
Hey Cummins,
Don't tell me your still winking and blowing kisses in her ears in order to get more intel... :B
โFeb-10-2023 12:01 PM
โFeb-10-2023 10:13 AM
โFeb-10-2023 09:27 AM
Cummins12V98 wrote:FishOnOne wrote:
Diesel's are due for a major break thru in technology that reduces the need or better yet eliminates the band-aid emissions equipment.
You mean like the Lady at Cummins that spoke of them working on such a system?
โFeb-10-2023 09:20 AM
Groover wrote:Oh Snap.I post something good and crazy gets the credit!
As StirCrazy said "There is more than the cost to measure value. Being able to increase range by 25% is worth something."
Not having to stop as often or worrying about giving out of fuel is nice. In virtually every discussion here about electric vehicles range is a key item. While it is less of an issue with diesels it is still an item.
If you are satisfied with your current range then you could carry 20% less fuel and increase your payload by 70lbs in a Superduty with the 48 gallon tank, or a 120lbs in my class A. Less time at the pump when you stop would be nice as well. Or don't use the extra weight capacity and have better performance.
A similar savings in DEF was reported. That is also worth time, weight and money. It is really amazing to me how some people blow off savings. It is almost like they are proud of how much they spend.
โFeb-10-2023 08:21 AM
StirCrazy wrote:JRscooby wrote:StirCrazy wrote:PastorCharlie wrote:
I am not concerned with how far I can go on a gallon of fuel. My concern is how much it cost to get me there.
isnt that one and the same, if you increase the range of a tank of gass it costs you less to get to your destination.
If you can go twice as far on a gallon, but each gallon costs twice as much, fuel costs per mile is the same. The extra money you spend for the engine to use the more expensive fuel is a loss.
But for most people that buy a new pickup every few years to claim to worry about cost to get there is silly, IMHO.
you lost me. why did the fuel jump to twice the price all of a sudden. and why are we talking bout different engines... this is all about the efficiency of these pistons, which realy is a cheep process to do, might add 500 bucks to the cost of building an engine if that..
this whole thread was about highlighting new technology which looks pretty cool and is showing some remarkable results through real world testing. and the post you replied to was just stating if a 25% reduction of fuel usage for the same distance reduces the costs of driving that same distance..
as for the buying new pickups every year, I don't personaly but I am almost done paying my truck off and I can tell you my diesel per month if I only ude the truck is higher than the loan payment, and that was when diesel and gas were the same price, laitly diesel has been 0.15 higher, normaly its 0.10 lower than gas but it seams to cycle up here.. so getting a 25% reduction in fuel uasge would be a huge chunk of change for people who actualy use there truck for more than hauling there camper once or twice a year.
Steve
โFeb-10-2023 07:04 AM
โFeb-10-2023 06:35 AM
โFeb-10-2023 05:30 AM
JRscooby wrote:StirCrazy wrote:PastorCharlie wrote:
I am not concerned with how far I can go on a gallon of fuel. My concern is how much it cost to get me there.
isnt that one and the same, if you increase the range of a tank of gass it costs you less to get to your destination.
If you can go twice as far on a gallon, but each gallon costs twice as much, fuel costs per mile is the same. The extra money you spend for the engine to use the more expensive fuel is a loss.
But for most people that buy a new pickup every few years to claim to worry about cost to get there is silly, IMHO.
โFeb-09-2023 09:25 AM
โFeb-09-2023 09:18 AM
StirCrazy wrote:PastorCharlie wrote:
I am not concerned with how far I can go on a gallon of fuel. My concern is how much it cost to get me there.
isnt that one and the same, if you increase the range of a tank of gass it costs you less to get to your destination.