Diesel vs gas......................

[blt2ski]

OK folks, there have been a few to many diesel vs gas threads that have shall we say gone to "Hell and a hand basket"! So if all of you would put in you BEST, no flaming reasons for going gas vs diesel, pro and con, I will either leave your thread, or copy and paste pertinant info to the 4 posts of pro and con of diesel or gas. This can include the GM 8.1 vs Dmax or Ford V-8/10 vs PSD etc too.

Be real and honest in you answers, not hear say, flaming etc PLEASE!

If posts are good ones, I will leave, if inflamatory or trolling in nature, they will be deleted! I will get this stick'd to the top for future parusing for those that need this type of info.

Added 6-23-04

We are getting closer to answers I am looking for etc.

Stuff like Ken's - T-Bone posts are good. There are a few others of you that have not posted, some with a 9 point question and answer type to figure out how you went with one or the other. If you are one of those, PLEASE repost in this thread. I may have to look up whom has done this and PM you, but if you think this is you, you now know what to do.

Also, for those of you with $ per gallon for either fuel right now, I would prefer to see a post with ...."in my area, diesel is typically .10 less than unleaded" then explain your numbers. As currently in the Seattle area, diesel and unleaded are any where from 2.05 -2.30 per gallon, with mid test .10 more and premium about .20 more, with equal high low splits. Two weeks ago those prices were upwards of .30 -.40 per gallon more. people were posting $ per gallon that were for me. "I wish" If someone is reading your post a year from now, they may want to know where your paying 1.65, when the price of fuel is over $3 per gallon. Let's keep prices out of it if possible.

Bert and tin tipi, got into a good discusion on the pros and cons of RPM's, drive train etc. I would prefer to NOT see the quote of the other in responding threads, maybe just write a quick wording of re tranny gearing, instead of the whole 40 words or so in that paragragh, so the repsonse is shorter if possible quicker and easier to read etc.

I have deleted some 15+/- posts, that were off topic etc. Please note, I am trying to keep this at the top, as the ONLY gas/diesel thread in this area. So if one is trying to decide, we do not have to go thru this BS any more. As such, I will be deleting ANY future posts close to resembling this type of topic. I may have to change "this" title to a better one, if one has a better sounding title, to be more positive, better claification, let me know here, or in a PM/e-mail, what ever you feel most comfortible with.

Again thank you for all of you that are keeping responses positive, etc.

Also we could use a few more positive reasons to go gas, as many can see I have both gas and diesel, both have a place! Both have positive reasons to buy that fuel, lets keep the threads etc to that purpose only!

Marty

[LJOHNS]

I get 16 mgh average on my 2005 F-350 PSD mixed highway and city. I just paid $2.79 per gallon on my fill up this morning on my way to work. The cheapest unleaded was $2.89. I only have 16K miles on this truck. I am hoping I got a good 6.0 PSD. Time will tell.

[Steakman]

Chevy= Joe Isuzu throw away diesel with great alison trans

I would call the LLY (04 - 06) Motor as excellent, the LBZ (06-07) as V. good & the LB7 (00-04), as average. I would also have to rate the Cummins as V. Good. But stuck with a garbage tranny - too bad. However that is all Dodge has going for it..great engine..the rest sucks. No room, lousy interior (read CHEAP- looks like a K car). I know as I owned one. Yea I could handle a Cuumins with a 6 spd ally in a Sierra 2500 HD. That would be a nice package...but by the time they get around to doing it...we will all be getting gallons per mile once the tree huggers and green house gas idiots get going. Mark my words this is only the begining of that particular cult crap.

(watch "The Great Global Warming Swindle" Google video and become informed of reality as Opposed to Al Gores BS.!)

anyway I apologize for rant..was disgressing.

Ford and the PS in my humble opinion was not worth considering.

For those looking at the New style Sierra/Silverado: BEWARE..the new LMM (08+)motor will not allow very many mods and is reputed to be a pig on fuel due to the ton of emission stuff on it. (check it out on DieselPlace.com)

I have to say that for a tow vehicle, one will likely spend plenty of time in the saddle. As such I want the smoothest ride - that leaves the GMC/Chev as the only option - again IMHO.

I just bought a slightly used (35k miles), Dmax CCSB 2006 (LBZ Motor), edition with the 6 spd Ally. I love it. But to make it really run well & get extra mpg, it needed a few mods: Blocked EGR, Turbo Back Exhaust, AFE filter, Transgo Jr. & Mag-Hytec Ally deep pan, FS2500 oil Bypass system. On top of that I finally got the programmer that in my opinion was worth every penny: Banks 6 Gun PDA. That leaves me with about ~420 RWHP and 700+ ft/lbs of torque. (L3 or L4)

So for Mileage......

On Level 4: City 16.2 miles per gallon
Hwy 20.2 miles per gallon

City is usually run at 60 kmh or 35 mph - hwy is at 124 or 75 mph. The right foot is rarely heavy...although there are times...!

Running: 245/75R16's for now (265's are on the horizon), MT Truck, & Ran in the open flats between
Calgary and Grande Prairie, Alberta...no hills.

All calculated by the DIC which is almost bang on for accuracy.

To my mind there is really no option if one wishes to tow with ease: Diesel is the way to go regardless of GM/FORD/DODGE...those we pick cause we like em. And besides, one can Make his own diesel fuel if one so desires....sure as hell can't do that for a gasser..!!

Let me See: in Calgary Flying J Diesel $ .835 per Litre
Esso Regular gas $ 1.059 per Litre

...for those of you in the US, that works out to $ .224/L times 3.7 = $ .83 Per gallon Cheaper.!


hmmmm can you say NO BRAINER.!

Cheers - A happy Diesel and Duramax Owner..!!

stk

[ohioviper]

For me it was an easy choice.
Ford= warmed over International school bus engine DT460.
Chevy= Joe Isuzu throw away diesel with great alison trans.
Dodge= Bullet proof Cummins engine.so-so trans.
I can replace a transmission cheaper than an engine.In fact if I want an alison behind my Cummins its now a doable upgrade. With the new Dodge 6 speed auto and the new Cummins 6.7 I think there will be even more pressure on Ford and Chevy.
Everyone knows the Cummins is a better engine. Some just wont admit to it.

[toto]

BertP wrote:

JIMNLIN wrote:
Jeff
sounds like BertP left out some actuals as usual when talking about something he doesn't own.

I don't own a CTD, but I have driven them and almost bought one.

JIMNLIN wrote:
power ..... from the PSD is a V8 and a higher rpm than the Cummins inline 6 low rpm engine that has peak torque at 1400-1600 rpm. The PSD is a little short on low rpm power vs the Cummins. Wind the PSD up and they are equal.

Since the CTD has 6 cylinders and the Dmax and PSD both have 8, for a given pwer output, the CTD has to develop 33% more power per cylinder than the DMax or PSD. That plus the fact that there are fewer power pulses per rpm is what causes the CTD (or any 6 cylinder engine) to vibrate more than an 8 (or 10 or 12 or...) cylinder engine.

JIMNLIN wrote:
fuel ecnomy .... the 6.0 PSD really struggles with fuel mpgs vs DMAX/Cummins. The poor milage ol' Bert referes to is a few '04.5 325/600 Cummins owners were complaning of lower than the '04 305/555 previous years models great fuel milage. The 325/600 Cummins still was getting better mpgs than the 6.0 PSD. Dodge came out with a TSB/flash that brought the mpgs up.

Struggle or not, I simply said that they all have approximately the same fuel consuption numbers. Dave stated that the CTD has superior numbers.

JIMNLIN wrote:
ease of maintence/costs ..... goes to the Cummins. Top loading 11 dollar Fleetguard/Cummins/MOPAR fuel filter/8 dollar oil filter along with a 7500/15000 mile oil change schedule/15 dollar Fleetguard air filter.

Dave siad ease of maintenance, not cost. Either way, though, it doesn't make a big difference. All three are approximately the same. Besides, except for filter and oil changes, not many pople do any maintenance on their diesels. Note that I didn't say that no one does their own maintenance, just that few do.

JIMNLIN wrote:
RELIABILITY .... this is the big difference. The Cummins has a 350000 mile fleet average before first overhaul record. The PSD is a 200000 mile, per Ford advertizing, life expectancy. The 6.0 PSD has no record for a fleet average yet and Ford is stopping production. The current new 6.4 PSD has no record either but hopefully Ford will get this one right.

Overhaul schedules and reliability are not the same thing. CTD's have had their reliability issues just like every other diesel and gasser out there.

JIMNLIN wrote:
To see for yourself about the 6.0 PSD check out thedieselstop.com web. To check on Dodge/Cummins see dieseltruckresource.com web.
Check them yourself and see the problems/issues/non issues for yourself
JIM

I am aware of them, Jim. I am not picking on any particular engine, just pointing out that the claims Dave made do not hold water. If you want to buy a CTD, go ahead. Buy two if you want. Just don't try to sell me a load of BS that it is vastly superior to anything else available on the market. It isn't.

Bert

Yes it is.

[BertP]

Jim, reliability and life expectancy are not the same thing. Life expectancy simply indicates how long a particular engine is expected to last before a major overhaul is required while reliability indicates the expected availability of an engine. If an engine keeps failing because of something simple like a crank position sensor, that engine is not very reliable. It may have a million mile life expectancy, but it isn't reliable.

Bert

[JIMNLIN]

BertP wrote:
[snip]
The bottom line, though is that all three have approximately the same level of reliability. Individual engines notwithstanding.

Bert

sorry, the reliability factor goes to the Cummins with 350000 fleet average. The DMAX and PSD are marketed as 200000 miles life expectency engines per their web site specs. Disagree with those known facts from their web sites and marketing specs if you want but I don't think they are BS. I didn't use the vastly superior term but some might draw that conclusion in differenced between a PSD 6.0 and the Cummins when you look at Fords buy backs in the 6.0's history.
JIM

[BertP]

So, then, we agree. I was not knocking the CTD just addressing claims that it is vastly superior to anything else on the market. As you said, the CTD and DMax appear to have the same realiability and from what I have read, the PSD isn't far behind. Yes, there have been some horror stories with the 6.0 but there have been horror stories with both the CTD and DMax. Stuff happens. The bottom line, though is that all three have approximately the same level of reliability. Individual engines notwithstanding.

Bert

[JIMNLIN]

BertP wrote:
[snip]
If you want to buy a CTD, go ahead. Buy two if you want. Just don't try to sell me a load of BS that it is vastly superior to anything else available on the market. It isn't.

Bert

vastly superior to anything on the market ?? The Cummins is a much more reliable engine and cheaper to maintain than the 6.0 PSD as the 350000 fleet average indicates. Even the 7.3 has a much better reliability record than the 6.0 has. The DMAX is making a great showing in the reliability area and if GM sticks with it I would think it would give the Cummins a good run in reliability. The new PSD 6.4 may indeed be a competetor in the diesel reliability field but only time will tell. As I stated look at thedieselstop.com or dieseltruckresource.com for real BS as you call it.
JIM

[BertP]

Rvndave wrote:
I, Dave posted my actual experiences with both a PSD and a Cummins. I put nearly 100,000 miles on the Ford and am up to 53,000 miles on the Cummins. Best mileage on the Ford was 14 MPH,

While I suspect that there is no shortage of Chevy owners out there that would agree with your statement that you couldn't get more than 14 HPH out of a Ford, I will assume that you meant 14 MPG 🙂

I do have to say though, that 14MPG sounds awfully low. I don't own a Ford, but I am sure that I have read reports from other Ford owners that they got better mileage than that. Even my dually does better than that.

Bert

[Rvndave]

I, Dave posted my actual experiences with both a PSD and a Cummins. I put nearly 100,000 miles on the Ford and am up to 53,000 miles on the Cummins. Best mileage on the Ford was 14 MPH, I get 22 MPG in the Cummins, both solo, same trip, same driver. Before I switched to the Cummins I talked to alot of owners and salespeople. I like to think I based my decision on what truck to buy on facts, as well as many owners opinions.

[BertP]

JIMNLIN wrote:
Jeff
sounds like BertP left out some actuals as usual when talking about something he doesn't own.

I don't own a CTD, but I have driven them and almost bought one.

JIMNLIN wrote:
power ..... from the PSD is a V8 and a higher rpm than the Cummins inline 6 low rpm engine that has peak torque at 1400-1600 rpm. The PSD is a little short on low rpm power vs the Cummins. Wind the PSD up and they are equal.

Since the CTD has 6 cylinders and the Dmax and PSD both have 8, for a given pwer output, the CTD has to develop 33% more power per cylinder than the DMax or PSD. That plus the fact that there are fewer power pulses per rpm is what causes the CTD (or any 6 cylinder engine) to vibrate more than an 8 (or 10 or 12 or...) cylinder engine.

JIMNLIN wrote:
fuel ecnomy .... the 6.0 PSD really struggles with fuel mpgs vs DMAX/Cummins. The poor milage ol' Bert referes to is a few '04.5 325/600 Cummins owners were complaning of lower than the '04 305/555 previous years models great fuel milage. The 325/600 Cummins still was getting better mpgs than the 6.0 PSD. Dodge came out with a TSB/flash that brought the mpgs up.

Struggle or not, I simply said that they all have approximately the same fuel consuption numbers. Dave stated that the CTD has superior numbers.

JIMNLIN wrote:
ease of maintence/costs ..... goes to the Cummins. Top loading 11 dollar Fleetguard/Cummins/MOPAR fuel filter/8 dollar oil filter along with a 7500/15000 mile oil change schedule/15 dollar Fleetguard air filter.

Dave siad ease of maintenance, not cost. Either way, though, it doesn't make a big difference. All three are approximately the same. Besides, except for filter and oil changes, not many pople do any maintenance on their diesels. Note that I didn't say that no one does their own maintenance, just that few do.

JIMNLIN wrote:
RELIABILITY .... this is the big difference. The Cummins has a 350000 mile fleet average before first overhaul record. The PSD is a 200000 mile, per Ford advertizing, life expectancy. The 6.0 PSD has no record for a fleet average yet and Ford is stopping production. The current new 6.4 PSD has no record either but hopefully Ford will get this one right.

Overhaul schedules and reliability are not the same thing. CTD's have had their reliability issues just like every other diesel and gasser out there.

JIMNLIN wrote:
To see for yourself about the 6.0 PSD check out thedieselstop.com web. To check on Dodge/Cummins see dieseltruckresource.com web.
Check them yourself and see the problems/issues/non issues for yourself
JIM

I am aware of them, Jim. I am not picking on any particular engine, just pointing out that the claims Dave made do not hold water. If you want to buy a CTD, go ahead. Buy two if you want. Just don't try to sell me a load of BS that it is vastly superior to anything else available on the market. It isn't.

Bert

[JIMNLIN]

Jeff
sounds like BertP left out some actuals as usual when talking about something he doesn't own.
power ..... from the PSD is a V8 and a higher rpm than the Cummins inline 6 low rpm engine that has peak torque at 1400-1600 rpm. The PSD is a little short on low rpm power vs the Cummins. Wind the PSD up and they are equal.
fuel ecnomy .... the 6.0 PSD really struggles with fuel mpgs vs DMAX/Cummins. The poor milage ol' Bert referes to is a few '04.5 325/600 Cummins owners were complaning of lower than the '04 305/555 previous years models great fuel milage. The 325/600 Cummins still was getting better mpgs than the 6.0 PSD. Dodge came out with a TSB/flash that brought the mpgs up.
ease of maintence/costs ..... goes to the Cummins. Top loading 11 dollar Fleetguard/Cummins/MOPAR fuel filter/8 dollar oil filter along with a 7500/15000 mile oil change schedule/15 dollar Fleetguard air filter.
RELIABILITY .... this is the big difference. The Cummins has a 350000 mile fleet average before first overhaul record. The PSD is a 200000 mile, per Ford advertizing, life expectancy. The 6.0 PSD has no record for a fleet average yet and Ford is stopping production. The current new 6.4 PSD has no record either but hopefully Ford will get this one right.
To see for yourself about the 6.0 PSD check out thedieselstop.com web. To check on Dodge/Cummins see dieseltruckresource.com web.
Check them yourself and see the problems/issues/non issues for yourself
JIM

[Paul_Clancy]

I know there are many diesel pickup trucks used by hot shotters (independent drivers who shuttle all types of things - including rvs, boats , horses, cars etc. across country) who exceed 500,000mi regularly. So it isnt uncommon when these vehicals are used for work but possibly true when used to pull rv trailers. If these trucks were as maintenence heavy as you suggest as miles climbed someone using it for business would either go out of business or be trading sooner than they are.

[ponie]

Owner of a 7.3 liter diesel 550 ford (2001) was reporting the cost to keep it running this year 07. Twenty three hundred dollars and the Ford service center still is unable to identify why the truck just quits.

The truck has 250,000 miles and I am sure the diesle itself can run for another 250, but if all the computer and sensor componets start to fail, whats the outcome of trying to run a truck for 500,000 as some claim? If service starts to cost 3000 a year whats the use.

What % of owners own and operate a truck to 500,000 miles without having to increase the cost of ownership significantly at 250,000 miles?

All this to say, this. The idea that RV owners operate trucks for 500,000 miles is very rare IMHO.

[BertP]

Don't mind Dave, Jeff. He tends to make the same claims repeatedly even though he knows they are wrong. If you d a search on "aluminum crankcase" you will find innumerable posts by Dave that the DMax has one and each time, his posts are followed by innumerable posts correcting him.

To answer your question, I don't have a PSD but there have been problems reported with the early 6.0 l version. There are many owners who have had absolutely no problems with them as well so if you buy one, it is hard to say if you will have a problem or not. From what I have read, it is suggested that you stay away from the '03 model but the others appear to be solid.

To answer Dave's claims about the CTD:

Power - The CTD has less power than either the PSD or DMax. Earlier versions (2003?) had 5 more HP than the DMax but 20 less than the PSD.

Fuel Economy - To the best of my knowledge, all three engines are approximately the same. I do remember, though, many CTD owners complaining of poor mileage with either their 04 or 05 (I forget which) when they first came out. I'm not sure if that has been addressed by Dodge or not.

Ease of Maintenence - Tot he best of my knowledge, it is just as easy to drive my DMax to the Chevy dealer as it is to drive a CTD truck to the Dodge dealer.

Reliability - All of the engines have had their probems including the CTD (cracked blocks and failed fuel pumps come to mind). If you look after them, all of them will give you excellent service.

Bert

No, I didn't guess about the vibrationof the CTD.