Used Dmax or New Cummins

[davisenvy]

I am currently looking to upgrade to a newer truck. I now have a 2006 Duramax and I am looking at a 2016-2017 with 0-10k mi Cummins or 2013-2014 50k mi Duramax.
Apples to Apples the Cummins is a cheaper truck and I do honest beleive the Duramax to be a better set up, but can't justify the extra cost of a Dmax. I am leaning towards the Cummins. I think the Dodge has a nicer interior and the exterior isn't bad either. Is the Duramax worth that much more than the Cummins?

Please don't turn this into a diesel vs gas debate and Ford is absolutely off the table.

[GeoBoy]

davisenvy wrote:

4x4ord wrote:
You want a public opinion poll? Why not look at the annual sales numbers....Ram vs Chevy and GM combined?

I don't really go with what the majority wants. Obama is a good example.

I absolutely love my LBZ Duramax, but I have recently purchased a FW and feel that I need a little more towing confidence. According to the numbers I am several hundred over on my payload and that doesn't make me feel very comfortable. The truck tows the FW great, but from what I have read and have been told by friends, the newer trucks tow much better. Just from the test drives I can tell you the brakes alone are worlds above my trucks brakes. My LBZ has been a great truck, but I think the newer trucks (even with the emissions junk) will tow safer than my current truck.

I love your first line, sooo true.

[rhagfo]

davisenvy wrote:
I went Ram shopping yesterday. I see pages of arguments and lots of off the subject stuff, but why hasn't anyone mentioned the low payload of the Ram 2500? It seems to be substantially lower than GM and Ford.

Anyways, I came home with a new 2016 Lamarie yesterday. The payload will work for what I need it for. I went to buy a used truck, but new 2016 trucks were just a few thousand more. I think the GM has a better transmission, but I think the Ram offers much more for the price. So far, the 68RFE trans doesn't seem to be that bad. The truck is very tall and I will have to have the FW sub frame raised like Me Again (Chris) suggested.

Well if you bought a 2500, you are dealing with a max GVWR of 10,000#, we know the Cummins is a bit heaver than the other two diesels. Then I believe there is more steel in a RAM so less payload. New I would have thought about a 3500SRW for the payload, but if you went with a 2016 closeout, maybe no 3500's.
That said congratulations on the new TV, I think you will be surprised.

[FishOnOne]

blofgren wrote:
This is a non issue on the 2013+ DEF equipped trucks.

I wouldn't go that far, but it's fair to say they have been improved

[blofgren]

This is a non issue on the 2013+ DEF equipped trucks.

[FishOnOne]

portablevcb wrote:
So, all I can say is the emission systems suck!

Am having a new turbo put in my 2009 Cummins this week. 115k miles so not too bad, but, still a PITA. I understand they changed that design later (2012?). Oh well.

I think they just added a shrader valve so you can clean the soot in the turbo without tearing it apart.

Cost of ownership.... BIL had a 09 a whopping 9 months and unloaded it due to the emission system.

[portablevcb]

So, all I can say is the emission systems suck!

Am having a new turbo put in my 2009 Cummins this week. 115k miles so not too bad, but, still a PITA. I understand they changed that design later (2012?). Oh well.

[Cummins12V98]

davisenvy wrote:
I went Ram shopping yesterday. I see pages of arguments and lots of off the subject stuff, but why hasn't anyone mentioned the low payload of the Ram 2500? It seems to be substantially lower than GM and Ford.

Anyways, I came home with a new 2016 Lamarie yesterday. The payload will work for what I need it for. I went to buy a used truck, but new 2016 trucks were just a few thousand more. I think the GM has a better transmission, but I think the Ram offers much more for the price. So far, the 68RFE trans doesn't seem to be that bad. The truck is very tall and I will have to have the FW sub frame raised like Me Again (Chris) suggested.

You will love the truck. The 68RFE is a learning trans. The Service Manager told me to run the SH!T out of it and I did with my 11 HO Dually for 300 miles from DaveSmith to home. Never had a single shifting issue as some do. I towed 28-29K for over 1/2 of the 65K i owned the truck.

Work it!!!

[Cummins12V98]

curtthegreat wrote:

Cummins12V98 wrote:

4x4ord wrote:
You want a public opinion poll? Why not look at the annual sales numbers....Ram vs Chevy and GM combined?

How about the guys that use their trucks to make their living as HotShotters and RV Haulers. RAM far outnumbers the others.

But that just goes back to the price thing. They're buying those trucks for their business, some business men go cheaper than others. That's why you see more Freightliner trucks on the highways, hauling freight, than Peterbilts. But come on, who wouldn't like to have new Peterbilt?

Yes I agree on the "price thing" ! It's the cost to maintain is where they save the $$$ with the RAM. Just talk to a few and see what THET say.

[Bumpyroad]

curtthegreat wrote:
. But come on, who wouldn't like to have new Peterbilt?

I certainly would
bumpy

[kw_00]

davisenvy wrote:
I went Ram shopping yesterday. I see pages of arguments and lots of off the subject stuff, but why hasn't anyone mentioned the low payload of the Ram 2500? It seems to be substantially lower than GM and Ford.

Anyways, I came home with a new 2016 Lamarie yesterday. The payload will work for what I need it for. I went to buy a used truck, but new 2016 trucks were just a few thousand more. I think the GM has a better transmission, but I think the Ram offers much more for the price. So far, the 68RFE trans doesn't seem to be that bad. The truck is very tall and I will have to have the FW sub frame raised like Me Again (Chris) suggested.

Congrats! Now for the pics! So what is the payload on that truck then? I didn't know it was lower then the GM twins or Ford. Regardless if it works for u great. The Cummins should be a great engine to pull with and easy to maintain.

[curtthegreat]

Cummins12V98 wrote:

4x4ord wrote:
You want a public opinion poll? Why not look at the annual sales numbers....Ram vs Chevy and GM combined?

How about the guys that use their trucks to make their living as HotShotters and RV Haulers. RAM far outnumbers the others.

But that just goes back to the price thing. They're buying those trucks for their business, some business men go cheaper than others. That's why you see more Freightliner trucks on the highways, hauling freight, than Peterbilts. But come on, who wouldn't like to have new Peterbilt?

[davisenvy]

I went Ram shopping yesterday. I see pages of arguments and lots of off the subject stuff, but why hasn't anyone mentioned the low payload of the Ram 2500? It seems to be substantially lower than GM and Ford.

Anyways, I came home with a new 2016 Lamarie yesterday. The payload will work for what I need it for. I went to buy a used truck, but new 2016 trucks were just a few thousand more. I think the GM has a better transmission, but I think the Ram offers much more for the price. So far, the 68RFE trans doesn't seem to be that bad. The truck is very tall and I will have to have the FW sub frame raised like Me Again (Chris) suggested.

[Grit_dog]

Haha!

[4x4ord]

I think he just wanted to call us old.:(