First Tow with my 6.4 Hemi

IdaD wrote:

ScottG wrote:

IdaD wrote:

ScottG wrote:
Don't get me wrong, if you need a big vehicle to tow or haul then that's understandable.
If you think you need one just because you have a family of 4 then I could easily argue against it.
And of course there's the ego issues of driving a status symbol. How do you get to someone like that.

I think safety is a fair consideration in terms of vehicle size as well. I'm not putting my wife and young kids in a cracker box when everybody else is driving trucks and SUVs.

You should do more research before assuming that because that argument doesn't hold water. SUV's generally have poorer crash ratings because in part to their propensity to roll or flip in an accident - something a five star rated auto wont do.

Rollover risk is certainly something to consider. Any vehicle can roll in the wrong situation, rating be damned. But yeah, a higher center of gravity increases the risk and again it's a fair consideration.

While we're on the subject of ratings, in a head on collision between a four star rated F250 Crew Cab and a five star rated Accord, which would you rather have your family in? How about if one of them hit you in a side impact situation - you want your family in the Accord or F250 when the other one blows that stop sign and smacks into them?

The thing about crashes in the real world is they rarely involve running at 45 mph into an immovable barrier. They more frequently involve two vehicles colliding into one another. When that happens, the relative weight and ride height of the participants in the accident starts to become fairly important.

You can what-if all day long. Crash tests are based on the most common types of collisions according to actual statistics. That includes the most common type which is the off center crash where corners of vehicles collide.
In real life you don't get to choose what kind of collision you get in. If you play against the odds and get something that has a lower rating, or has the likelihood to flip, the statistics show your family is more likely to be injured.
More realistically, people dont buy big SUV or trucks because they need them, it's more a fashion statement.

jmtandem wrote:

It's always $0.75 to $1.00 more for diesel here. Currently it's $2.50 for gas and $3.50 for diesel.

I sure hope you get a significant break in taxes, registration, insurance or something to make up for the cost difference. If I am not mistaken the Cummins mid range engine plant that makes the Ram truck's diesels is located in your state.

No tax breaks here.
I've worked for Cummins for 21 years. Not at the plant thou.

9.5 mpg's dragging around 8,000 lbs? That seems pretty acceptable to me for a gasser, congrats on the truck.

To the OP, sorry your thread has taken a hard left.

You might save your 'sorrys' for when you pass gas in church. This thread is not about saying sorry. Every OP knows that any thread they start can go any direction and that is part of what makes threads interesting. So far everybody has been very civil in their comments even though expressing differing opinions and facts. It has been a good thread so far. And nobody has said anything negative about the OP or the original post. In fact, I think we all appreciate the fact that the OP did post this thread on the new 6.4 gas engine.

Congrats on the new truck and here is hoping for many carefree towing miles ahead.

ScottG wrote:

IdaD wrote:

ScottG wrote:
Don't get me wrong, if you need a big vehicle to tow or haul then that's understandable.
If you think you need one just because you have a family of 4 then I could easily argue against it.
And of course there's the ego issues of driving a status symbol. How do you get to someone like that.

I think safety is a fair consideration in terms of vehicle size as well. I'm not putting my wife and young kids in a cracker box when everybody else is driving trucks and SUVs.

You should do more research before assuming that because that argument doesn't hold water. SUV's generally have poorer crash ratings because in part to their propensity to roll or flip in an accident - something a five star rated auto wont do.

Agree that SUV is more likely to roll over than a car, BUT I still see a lot of cars on their roofs!!

ScottG wrote:

IdaD wrote:

ScottG wrote:
Don't get me wrong, if you need a big vehicle to tow or haul then that's understandable.
If you think you need one just because you have a family of 4 then I could easily argue against it.
And of course there's the ego issues of driving a status symbol. How do you get to someone like that.

I think safety is a fair consideration in terms of vehicle size as well. I'm not putting my wife and young kids in a cracker box when everybody else is driving trucks and SUVs.

You should do more research before assuming that because that argument doesn't hold water. SUV's generally have poorer crash ratings because in part to their propensity to roll or flip in an accident - something a five star rated auto wont do.

Rollover risk is certainly something to consider. Any vehicle can roll in the wrong situation, rating be damned. But yeah, a higher center of gravity increases the risk and again it's a fair consideration.

While we're on the subject of ratings, in a head on collision between a four star rated F250 Crew Cab and a five star rated Accord, which would you rather have your family in? How about if one of them hit you in a side impact situation - you want your family in the Accord or F250 when the other one blows that stop sign and smacks into them?

The thing about crashes in the real world is they rarely involve running at 45 mph into an immovable barrier. They more frequently involve two vehicles colliding into one another. When that happens, the relative weight and ride height of the participants in the accident starts to become fairly important.

IdaD wrote:

ScottG wrote:
Don't get me wrong, if you need a big vehicle to tow or haul then that's understandable.
If you think you need one just because you have a family of 4 then I could easily argue against it.
And of course there's the ego issues of driving a status symbol. How do you get to someone like that.

I think safety is a fair consideration in terms of vehicle size as well. I'm not putting my wife and young kids in a cracker box when everybody else is driving trucks and SUVs.

You should do more research before assuming that because that argument doesn't hold water. SUV's generally have poorer crash ratings because in part to their propensity to roll or flip in an accident - something a five star rated auto wont do.

ScottG wrote:
Don't get me wrong, if you need a big vehicle to tow or haul then that's understandable.
If you think you need one just because you have a family of 4 then I could easily argue against it.
And of course there's the ego issues of driving a status symbol. How do you get to someone like that.

I think safety is a fair consideration in terms of vehicle size as well. I'm not putting my wife and young kids in a cracker box when everybody else is driving trucks and SUVs.

In just under 190,000 miles I estimate my diesel has cost $16,000 less for fuel based on average 20% price spread to 87 gasohol. The current market value of the truck appears to be higher than a gas equivalent by the cost difference to gas when new of $7000 so that zeros out.

Anything can happen to a machine but there are lots of Cummins work pickups in the region with double that miles on them that have not needed any major work yet. My 190000 miles represents less than 6000 engine hours which is not high time on a diesel.