Ford Super Duty 6.2 Super Ike Gauntlet Pull

MFL wrote:
^^^Thanks for that! Had to show your post to my wife, as she had never heard anyone say that about me! :C

Jerry

That's awesome!

^^^Thanks for that! Had to show your post to my wife, as she had never heard anyone say that about me! :C

Jerry

MFL wrote:

Grit dog wrote:
^You revived a 4 year old thread to try n start an argument about an engine that is now replaced by a newer one?

Slow day in your world? Lol

Whoa Grit!!! My beloved 6.2 is not a replaced relic, just the base engine, that can be upgraded to a newer one!

Reviving an old thread for sake of argument/discussion may be better than no activity on a slow day???

Not sure though, since I never argue, or stir!

Jerry

I concur, Jerry you are a "SAINT" :B

Grit dog wrote:
^You revived a 4 year old thread to try n start an argument about an engine that is now replaced by a newer one?

Slow day in your world? Lol

Whoa Grit!!! My beloved 6.2 is not a replaced relic, just the base engine, that can be upgraded to a newer one!

Reviving an old thread for sake of argument/discussion may be better than no activity on a slow day???

Not sure though, since I never argue, or stir!

Jerry

Grit dog wrote:

And now your so anti diesel

Why don't you point out where I made the anti-diesel comment.

In fact, why don't you point out anytime I made an anti-diesel comment.

Since you can't, all I did was point out the financial ignorance of the statement. Nothing more.

The obvious escapes you. Did you go to the the AOC or Bye-don school of finance? LOL.

Grit dog wrote:
^You revived a 4 year old thread to try n start an argument about an engine that is now replaced by a newer one?

Slow day in your world? Lol

X2

Devo the dog wrote:

rhagfo wrote:
Well yes the upfront cost is more, but worth more at trade in or selling.

LOL.
This is no different than the woman who claims "it was on sale and we saved a lot of money" after spending thousands on more shoes and clothes, to be put in a full closet of nothing to wear.

Not even close!

Devo the dog wrote:

rhagfo wrote:
Well yes the upfront cost is more, but worth more at trade in or selling.

LOL.
This is no different than the woman who claims "it was on sale and we saved a lot of money" after spending thousands on more shoes and clothes, to be put in a full closet of nothing to wear.

He’s back!!
And now your so anti diesel, you’re making weird comparisons that don’t even make sense!
Maybe this exhumed thread will be fun!
Have you sold that pos Ram yet or keeping it around to have something to complain about still?

"LOL" all ya want

Just did a comparison between a 2015 RAM 3500 4x4 Crew with and without Diesel. Gasser was a deduct of 9,300. That's a lot more than the cost difference to go Diesel when I bought my truck. Take into consideration I have the HO/AISIN and that would make a bigger difference.

Plain and simple with a RAM/CUMMINS you will get your investmentent back and MORE!

Gatorm wrote:

IdaD wrote:

spud1957 wrote:
Of course it always turns into the diesel argument. Yes, high fuel mileage going up the gauntlet. What are your diesels getting going up it? I suspect the delta between the two is not much different than non gauntlet towing.

I think they run around 4 or a little better on that particular run from videos I've seen in the past. Real world with a camper you're probably comparing 7 or 8 with a big gas truck versus 11 or 12 with a diesel. Not great either way. Mileage is only part of the equation, though. Screaming up a grade at 5500 RPM isn't my idea of a relaxing trip even though I know they're designed to do it. I would also bet that the truck in the video would struggle significantly more if it were pulling something like a fifth wheel that drags a lot more air.

In my mind there's really not much cost difference between the two if you look at a total ownership cost. The diesel is more up front and will cost a little more to maintain, but will get better fuel economy and resale value. Which begs the question - if the cost delta is immaterial, why not opt for the higher performing diesel? That's something you can appreciate anytime you get behind the wheel.

If this were true then your statement of going with the diesel would be obvious. The problem is, this isn’t the case. The diesel cost more up front by $8-10k, it takes 2-3x more oil every oil change, fuel filters are $100 and up every 2-3 oil changes, fuel is $.30-50 more per gallon, not to mention if you ever have a def/dpf failure or a turbo failure or injector failure or complete fuel system replacement (any of these sound familiar? I bet they do) then the cost of ownership is way out of balance. The diesel pulls a ton better. Trust me I know. I’m a auto dealer and sell lots of 3/4 and 1 ton trucks so I’ve driven and used all of them in gas and diesel. If you pull over 10k lbs more than once a week I would go diesel. If you don’t, save yourself a bunch of money and time and buy the gas truck. Also, the gas truck, in my opinion is a better daily driver than a diesel.

Well 4 years after making that post I still have the same diesel truck and while it hasn't been perfect I'm still happy with it and have had no major issues. In fact no issues at all related to it being a diesel other than a $200 sensor that took 10 minutes to replace. If you prefer dragging a trailer up a hill with a turd, by all means go for it just please pull over to let others pass.