NC Hauler wrote:
larry barnhart wrote:
NC Hauler wrote:
Nice personal insight...thanks for the information.
900 ft lbs of torque. I feel so sorry for you and 12v98 having to drive around
with your little engines. I knew you should have waited.
But life goes on so be happy.
chevman
:h..Ok Larry, I give up, what was that about? I have my 13'...it's paid for...it's my retirement truck...You don't have to feel sorry for me, I don't understand why you would...I don't have 900ftlb of TQ, nor will I....I'm happy with what I have...I'll be 65 next month...I've bought my last truck. Guess you can rag Ron.....Guess the buddy thing only applies if we own the same make truck? I owned chevy's from 75 through 2010, great truck....Oh, and I'm happy..been married almost 45 years, lived through a plant shut down and a lay off, raised three great children who are parents of my 4 grandchildren, whom I love dearly....survived Viet Nam...heck...I'm happy...truck doesn't have much to do with happiness in my life.
Sorry you had to waste a post on me....as you stated...life goes on.
I think he is talking about Chevy going to 900 pounds of torque in two years. Again ram beat them to the punch
http://www.fourwheeler.com/news/1506-ram-truck-unveils-900-lb-ft-of-torque-for-2016-cummins-67l-engine/?sm_id=social_aumofourwheelerhub_default_20150622_47875056&adbid=10153454018784343&adbpl=fb&adbpr=134572609342#__federated=1
