Diesel vs gas for truck campers?

[Devocamper]

Have posted a few questios phere on the truck camper forum asking for help in down sizing to a TC and thanks for the help so far, I have been going over the weights of the TC's that we have looked at and all are over weight for my truck(07 Chevy 3500HD long bed Ext cab dual rear wheel diesel) but I do understand I can add suspension upgrades and maybe handle the bigger units but looking at replacing the truck and with the gas trucks having more capacity my question is do the gas 3500 or 350's handle the load of a heavy TC ? I know about towing and my current diesel is great for pulling around a 15k fifth wheel but do you need the diesel to have a good truck setup for a TC . Some of the newer 3500's and 350 have much higher load capacities when they have the gas motor. I think Chevy is around 7200 and ram may be higher with gvwr's around 13000 compared to my 07 at 11400. Thanks for any help and info
Mike

[skyhammer]

Reddog1 wrote:
Unfortunately, in California you have to smog 1998 and newer, even the 12-valve. To avoid the smog check, you must have a 1997 or older. I have had my 1996 12-valve since 2001. Never had any issues with it. I recently bought my 2004 DSL, so time will tell.

I too had a 1986 GMC dually. Had it for over 15 years. My only real complaint with it mechanically was it had no shame in using gas.

Wayne

That is just not true, it may be true for your county but not mine(Humboldt).
I have a lot of vehicles all bought new that run in age from 1985-2013.
I have never had to have a smog check done on any of them.
Now, If I decide to sell one of them, I, the seller must pay for a smog check for the new owner, other than that there are no smog checks...at least for now.
If I wish to sell one of my vehicles and I have to install some parts to enable it pass smog, such a catalytic converter etc.. the new owner can take those parts off if they like and not have to worry because there won't be another smog required until they sell the vehicle again.

[Reddog1]

Unfortunately, in California you have to smog 1998 and newer, even the 12-valve. To avoid the smog check, you must have a 1997 or older. I have had my 1996 12-valve since 2001. Never had any issues with it. I recently bought my 2004 DSL, so time will tell.

I too had a 1986 GMC dually. Had it for over 15 years. My only real complaint with it mechanically was it had no shame in using gas.

Wayne

[burningman]

I've had gas trucks all my life, and they will get the job done, for a lot less money overall despite poorer fuel economy. But I've gone diesel for the power and the ability to really pull hard for a long time under a heavy load up hill without breaking.
I've kept my old '86 GMC because it can do what NONE of the newer trucks can do.
It can be repaired at home for cheap... not that it needs it much. It's got no computer, no electronics, no sensors, modules... it doesn't throw codes or regen or go into limp mode.
If it has a couple PSI fuel pressure and spark to the plugs, it runs. If it doesn't run, I can figure out why with a 12 volt test light and a few basic tools - and fix it!
I can put a whole new motor in at home in the driveway in a weekend for a couple thousand dollars.
If I'm way out in the middle of nowhere, I feel a LOT safer in my old truck even though I like the newer ones better.
Simplicity IS reliability. The less to go wrong, the less goes wrong.

What I consider the best truck to own is a 1998 Dodge 12 Valve Cummins.
That's the first year of the quad cab and last year of the no-computer 12 Valve Cummins. It's the best mix of modern comfort and old school reliability there is.

I have a '99 because I found the cleanest, lowest mileage, best equipped example I'd seen. But I do hate the electronics and may someday back-date the thing with a '94-'98 parts truck.

[Vinsil]

My wife used to sell cars when we were younger. (Mercedes and Acura), she loves cars and has a knowledge that rival most men. She attended training and ride and drives offered to the sales staff. The old dogs gave her a bunch of **** for doing this, always telling her she was wasting her time and that buyers didn't care about specs or even features, it was was purely about getting the sale.

Sadly they were mostly correct. She could give specs to the buyer but those that wanted them mostly had the knowledge already from the research they did...and most didn't care if it had a v6 or v8 or turbo....."it's pretty!"

So....thus the culture of sales staff continues.

[sbryan]

run100 wrote:

Reddog1 wrote:
However, when purchasing a $50,000 or $60,000 truck, it is reasonable for consumers to expect some level of product knowledge, especially when specific capabilities are required. Furthermore, the big 3 are constantly touting the beefiness of the vehicles in their advertisements, so the facts behind those numbers should be available on the lot.

I wouldn't expect the sales staff to fully understand the inner workings of the engine and transmission, but payload and tow capacity should be part of their basic training. Also, although I wouldn't expect them to spout off the actual rating for each truck, it's fair to expect a general understanding of the two measures.

Good rule of thumb is to trust, but verify.

Especially since these days $50,000 trucks are "cheap". You can pretty easily get a new 2017 truck up to $90,000.:E

Pretty scary - a mortgage size payment on a depreciating asset.:R

[run100]

Reddog1 wrote:
Personally, I think people put to much responsibility and trust on sales people, especially in the auto industry. Do we expect a grocery store clerk to tell us how to prepare all of the food products they sell? At a hardware store, do you expect a sale employee to know the details of every product? At a automobile sales lot, have you ever looked in the employees parking lot to see if they all drive the same vehicle they sell? Most of us do not like to hear it, but it is our responsibility to do research on what we want. Unfortunately, we typically will buy on impulse if we like the color.

True, many consumers buy on impulse and respond to a product's flash. So, much of the marketing and salesmanship is geared toward that group and little product knowledge is required - just show them something pretty. This may be fine when selling a sedan, mini van or even a sports car, but specialty vehicles that require certain capabilities, especially where safety comes into play, is a whole different story.

My decision making process tends to involve an information gathering period, where I solicit input from multiple sources - word of mouth, "experts" and written sources. I also follow the philosophy of believing nothing of what I hear and 1/2 of what I read. As information is gathered, I compare notes. This phase usually allows for separation of fact and fiction and can sometimes be a challenging process. Prime example - gas or diesel debate. Often, there's no absolute right or wrong answer, but given a person's needs and available resources, one may be a wiser choice than the other.

Still, to compare the expected knowledge of the grocery store clerk to the auto salesperson is a tad strange. When purchasing $10 worth of produce, most consumers are not reliant, or drastically impacted, by the clerks knowledge level. However, when purchasing a $50,000 or $60,000 truck, it is reasonable for consumers to expect some level of product knowledge, especially when specific capabilities are required. Furthermore, the big 3 are constantly touting the beefiness of the vehicles in their advertisements, so the facts behind those numbers should be available on the lot.

I wouldn't expect the sales staff to fully understand the inner workings of the engine and transmission, but payload and tow capacity should be part of their basic training. Also, although I wouldn't expect them to spout off the actual rating for each truck, it's fair to expect a general understanding of the two measures.

Good rule of thumb is to trust, but verify.

[Steve_in_29]

Vinsil wrote:

Steve_in_29 wrote:

Reddog1 wrote:
Personally, I think people put to much responsibility and trust on sales people, especially in the auto industry. Do we expect a grocery store clerk to tell us how to prepare all of the food products they sell? At a hardware store, do you expect a sale employee to know the details of every product? At a automobile sales lot, have you ever looked in the employees parking lot to see if they all drive the same vehicle they sell? Most of us do not like to hear it, but it is our responsibility to do research on what we want. Unfortunately, we typically will buy on impulse if we like the color.

Wayne

While it's a dying art now at one point REAL hardware store employees were a source of MUCH information about their products. My local (non chain store) hardware store has guys working that are in their 60s and they can tell you pretty much everything you need to know.

I live in a small town, 2000 people.

We have a auto parts store, older guys and one younger guy. They have the old school books and know what your talking about most of the time (if you know what YOUR talking about) and their prices are on point. I LOVE going there...it reminds me of my experience growing up in a small town and having good, knowleadege people to help. I worked these jobs as I was younger and prided myself on the knowledge and helpfulness.

Sadly this is not the norm these days....gosh, I am getting old. Lol

Before they closed the NAPA here, the most knowledgeable person in the store was a nice lady who was about 70. she knew everything and would regularly school the younger guys working there.

[Vinsil]

Steve_in_29 wrote:

Reddog1 wrote:
Personally, I think people put to much responsibility and trust on sales people, especially in the auto industry. Do we expect a grocery store clerk to tell us how to prepare all of the food products they sell? At a hardware store, do you expect a sale employee to know the details of every product? At a automobile sales lot, have you ever looked in the employees parking lot to see if they all drive the same vehicle they sell? Most of us do not like to hear it, but it is our responsibility to do research on what we want. Unfortunately, we typically will buy on impulse if we like the color.

Wayne

While it's a dying art now at one point REAL hardware store employees were a source of MUCH information about their products. My local (non chain store) hardware store has guys working that are in their 60s and they can tell you pretty much everything you need to know.

I live in a small town, 2000 people.

We have a auto parts store, older guys and one younger guy. They have the old school books and know what your talking about most of the time (if you know what YOUR talking about) and their prices are on point. I LOVE going there...it reminds me of my experience growing up in a small town and having good, knowleadege people to help. I worked these jobs as I was younger and prided myself on the knowledge and helpfulness.

Sadly this is not the norm these days....gosh, I am getting old. Lol

[Steve_in_29]

Reddog1 wrote:
Personally, I think people put to much responsibility and trust on sales people, especially in the auto industry. Do we expect a grocery store clerk to tell us how to prepare all of the food products they sell? At a hardware store, do you expect a sale employee to know the details of every product? At a automobile sales lot, have you ever looked in the employees parking lot to see if they all drive the same vehicle they sell? Most of us do not like to hear it, but it is our responsibility to do research on what we want. Unfortunately, we typically will buy on impulse if we like the color.

Wayne

While it's a dying art now at one point REAL hardware store employees were a source of MUCH information about their products. My local (non chain store) hardware store has guys working that are in their 60s and they can tell you pretty much everything you need to know.

[HMS_Beagle]

On the 6.7L 2011+ Ford, it dumps fuel through the injectors on the left bank, four cylinders. On my '15, instantaneous highway mileage goes from about 19 to about 14, for 20 minutes or so. This happens about every 400 miles. It costs about 0.5 mpg averaged over the cycle. I have captured the engine data through the OBD port on several of them.

The latest PCM flash changes the regen strategy to dump less fuel in both banks, all 8 cylinders. This was done to solve a rare problem with the '15-16 trucks. I haven't had mine done yet as I don't have the symptoms, but reports are it impacts mileage less.

You could only do an operator commanded regen on XL and XLT trucks from the earlier years, and only as a factory option. To do it the truck had to be parked and the hood open. This was for those trucks which idle a lot (service and emergency trucks) - idling builds soot faster.

If you do not instrument the engine you would not know the regen is happening. Noise, power, all the same. You will see the instantaneous mileage dip while it is going on.

Here is a capture of a regen, in the middle of it I pulled of the freeway and drove through town and back on the freeway. The regen starts at about 4.7 minutes and stops at about 26.8 minutes:

[S_Davis]

My 2013 Chevy does lose some power when in regen, it is a little sluggish. I think it has to do with the way the turbo vanes adjust to get the exhaust up to temperature for the regen process.

[jimh406]

For Fords, 6.7 DPF is way more reliable compared to the DPF they put with the 6.4. My friend who has a 6.7 still can't tell what is going on with the DPF in 2016. He heard the F450 has more ability to see what is going on and force a regen. I don't know if anyone can confirm or not. Hopefully, they'll fix it in 2017 models. I think it would be better if they'd allow the driver to force a regen and control when they happen as well as know if they did occur.

I'm not a fan of the algorithms that guess when the DPF should kick in. We have these high/steep things called mtns out here. 🙂

[Buzzcut1]

Oregun wrote:
Lots of good discussion here.
Has the stock 6.7 proven to be reliable or does it also need modification
to achieve that?

well my stock 2011 6.7 now has 100k on it. As far as I can tell the only issues have been an oil leak at the turbo base plate and a blown intercooler hose. both at around 95k

[Oregun]

Lots of good discussion here.
Has the stock 6.7 proven to be reliable or does it also need modification
to achieve that?

[jimh406]

Clearly the first generation dpf logic doesn't work very well. If it worked, Ford service managers wouldn't now recommend dpf deletes. 🙂 Still, it's unclear how much dpf and def is going to help our air.