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

[Yahooligan]

Biggziff wrote:
I'm serious. However...if you buy a diesel to run around town then you bought the wrong truck for the wrong reasons. This is a RV forum and a towing sub forum. I have to assume that anyone in here is interested in towing with the truck they bought at least some of the time.

Not disagreeing, but some people have 1 vehicle to do multiple roles. They probably bought it to tow, but it also serves as their daily driver. In this case they need to evaluate how much driving of they're going to do of each type, diesel isn't the best choice for everyone even though it's the best choice for towing, IMO.

Me, I take the wife's minivan if I'm going to run short errands. The truck stays parked if I'm not leaving town.

[04FX4]

I have a 2010 F350 diesel and I use it to tow a light TT in the summer. I drive short distances to work everyday, truck only hits operating temp in very hot weather or if it is plugged in over night. I have had 0 problems with my truck and hands down is the best Ford truck |I have owned.

[Biggziff]

I'm serious. However...if you buy a diesel to run around town then you bought the wrong truck for the wrong reasons. This is a RV forum and a towing sub forum. I have to assume that anyone in here is interested in towing with the truck they bought at least some of the time.

[Yahooligan]

Biggziff wrote:

That's just nonsense. There is no way Ford would produce a truck that is only designed for long haul.

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or serious, but NONE of the big 3 diesels that have a DPF and don't use DEF are really suitable for around-town or short trip (Less than 30 miles or so) because of the DPF. If you don't get it out on the highway for a stretch then the DPF regen will never happen and the DPF will become full, putting you in limp mode and directing you to visit your dealer for service.

Even without the DPF I wouldn't buy a diesel if it would be subjected to 90% around town/short trip driving and 10% towing/highway. It'd never get up to temp and you'd end up with more headaches than if you used the truck like it was meant to be used. These are not the same engines and emissions systems that are used in FedEx and UPS trucks.

[Biggziff]

Tom Holsinger wrote:
I asked my local Ford dealer's service people about this truck issue yesterday, and they all recommended the V-10 gasoline F-250 over any Ford diesel save the 2011 models for commuter use by my wife and I. They agreed that our short, multiple stops, commutes would create horrible maintenance problems for the older Ford diesel emissions systems.

That's just nonsense. There is no way Ford would produce a truck that is only designed for long haul.

[overw8chevy]

I'd like to see a copy or link to the federal regulations that say

"Federal regulations REQUIRE that diesel pickups in the 250/2500 - 350/3500 range have emissions systems optimized for long-distance hauling of heavy loads. So they're all built with that."

[Hannibal]

Local Dodge dealer told me the same thing about the Dodge Cummins last year. Not good for commuting or light route work.

[Tom_Holsinger]

I asked my local Ford dealer's service people about this truck issue yesterday, and they all recommended the V-10 gasoline F-250 over any Ford diesel save the 2011 models for commuter use by my wife and I. They agreed that our short, multiple stops, commutes would create horrible maintenance problems for the older Ford diesel emissions systems.

[RFOneWatt]

Ford has way too much to lose if the 2011's turn out to be troublesome.

I had the choice between a 2010 and a 2011. I picked the 2010. For what I use the truck for I'd rather deal with a a couple less MPG's than spend 50-60k to be a guinea pig for their new Mexican built engines.

Ya gotta admit though, at first glance the 2011's certainly seem to be a winner. No doubt about that. It's still way too early to say one way or the other but we'll see how they do in the long run.

For your viewing pleasure...filler CAPS on a 2011 F-250 SD:

2011 Ford F250 Fuel Filler Door

[Tom_Holsinger]

RFOneWatt,

This is why I said, "Maybe the new urea-based system on Fords for the 2011 model year will be that but, given Ford's luck with diesel pickups in the past, I wouldn't put much hope in it."

IMO one of the reasons the emissions tests for super-duty pickups focus only on their use in hauling heavy loads at relatively steady speeds for long distances, as opposed to a variety of tests over the range of uses, is politics. Environmental wackos dominate the testing process, and they are plain opposed to the concept of super-duty pickups. They'd much rather we all used Priuses and Segways, and don't give a hoot about actual work.

They currently dominate more of the government than that, but I won't go there to keep the moderators happy.

Getting back to the point, it may well be possible to devise real-world emissions tests for super-duty pickups which will work reasonably well both in terms of controlling emissions over the whole range of uses and not causing significant maintenance issues. I"m not that familiar with the technology.

But I am very familiar with the politics involved, and the people who've control the tests for the past 10-15 years plain won't allow that. We'll have to throw them out and put people in charge who aren't opposed to the concept of motor vehicles.

[RFOneWatt]

Tom Holsinger wrote:
RFoneWatt,

What is the tow capacity of those vehicles? We're talking about "long-distance hauling of heavy loads", and you describe those as "passenger vehicles".

Oh, I agree with you completely -- how can I not when you are stating facts?

I was just pointing out that it seems that they are getting close to producing something that's a nice "in-between."

Not sure about about the Grand Cherokee but the Liberty CRD is rated @ 5000LB tow capacity. (Not that it's very smart to tow something that weighs substantially more than the vehicle you are towing it with.)

The CRD is being used more and more in commercial vehicles though - as I said before I am seeing lots of delivery vehicles using them.

I do believe Chrysler calls them Sprinters.

[Tom_Holsinger]

RFoneWatt,

What is the tow capacity of those vehicles? We're talking about "long-distance hauling of heavy loads", and you describe those as "passenger vehicles".

The problem with the emissions systems of diesel pickups is that the test the Feds use for approving those is based on minimal emissions when hauling heavy loads long distances. Diesel pickups are used for all sorts of purposes, but the Feds test for only one.

One size does not fit all here. We're stuck with the usual idiot regulatory system screwing things up.

RFOneWatt wrote:

Tom Holsinger wrote:
AFAIK, there simply is NOT ANY diesel emissions system which works as well for short distance stop & go traffic as it does for long-distance hauling of heavy loads. There isn't anything even close.

What do you think about the VM Motori 2.6 & 3.0 CRD's used in the 2005-2006 Jeep Liberty, and 2009-Present Jeep Grand Cherokee? (Variations of this engine have been used all over the world in passenger vehicles for MANY years)

I have also been noticing quite a few delivery vehicles in my area sporting the CRD Logo.

Of course they do the best on the e-way, just like any vehicle but they don't seem to have any issues with stop and go either...

Apples to Oranges... 🙂

[RFOneWatt]

Tom Holsinger wrote:
AFAIK, there simply is NOT ANY diesel emissions system which works as well for short distance stop & go traffic as it does for long-distance hauling of heavy loads. There isn't anything even close.

What do you think about the VM Motori 2.6 & 3.0 CRD's used in the 2005-2006 Jeep Liberty, and 2009-Present Jeep Grand Cherokee? (Variations of this engine have been used all over the world in passenger vehicles for MANY years)

I have also been noticing quite a few delivery vehicles in my area sporting the CRD Logo.

Of course they do the best on the e-way, just like any vehicle but they don't seem to have any issues with stop and go either...

Apples to Oranges... 🙂

[Tom_Holsinger]

Diesel delivery trucks have emissions systems optimized for short distance stop & go driving. Try to find a diesel pickup in the 250/2500 - 350/3500 range with an emissions system optimized for short distance stop & go driving.

Better, try to find a mechanic who will risk his license modifying the emissions system on a diesel pickup in the 250/2500 - 350/3500 range so it will be optimized for short distance stop & go driving. Assuming you find one, ask him how much it would cost and get back to us.

Federal regulations REQUIRE that diesel pickups in the 250/2500 - 350/3500 range have emissions systems optimized for long-distance hauling of heavy loads. So they're all built with that.

And it is that emissions system which causes the most problems for diesel pickups most of whose use is for short-distance stop & go traffic.

AFAIK, there simply is NOT ANY diesel emissions system which works as well for short distance stop & go traffic as it does for long-distance hauling of heavy loads. There isn't anything even close.

The most we can hope for is the least bad. Maybe the new urea-based system on Fords for the 2011 model year will be that but, given Ford's luck with diesel pickups in the past, I wouldn't put much hope in it.

[Yahooligan]

Jarlaxle wrote:
OK, please tell me how the emission systems and standards on a Ram 5500 with a 6.7 Cummins and 17,500lbs GVWR and a Freightliner-chassis UPS truck with a 6.7 Cummins and a 17,500lb GVWR differ. Be specific.

Why are you bringing the Ram 5500 into this? How about sticking to your original argument, which was comparing UPS/FedEx trucks to Ram 2500/3500 trucks. The Ram 2500/3500 pickups have EGR and DPF, no DEF or SCR. The Dodge/Ram C&C trucks use DEF and have SCR so even the Ram 3500 pickup and Ram 3500 C&C trucks have different emissions systems.

The UPS and FedEx trucks with the 6.7 use SCR.

So, again, you can't compare the MDTs with the 2500/3500 pickups in terms of emissions systems and how well they work (or don't work) under similar conditions.