Another Win For GM's HD's

[sacmarata]

And you also get 28 MPG empty and 21 loaded with 10k lbs behind you?

Who said that?

With stock tires and the topper on I got 24mpg empty once. that was a 300mile trip so I consider it to be a pretty accurate hand calculation. I generally average about 20 empty and 14 loaded, but I have a lead foot. I wouldnt doubt someone could average way better empty. Loaded is too hard to average due to weight and roads.

 

[fordmantpw]

Who said that?

With stock tires and the topper on I got 24mpg empty once. that was a 300mile trip so I consider it to be a pretty accurate hand calculation. I generally average about 20 empty and 14 loaded, but I have a lead foot. I wouldnt doubt someone could average way better empty. Loaded is too hard to average due to weight and roads.

Most that brag about out-towing new diesels with their old lightly modded diesels also brag about getting superhuman MPG numbers out of their diesels. Glad to see you aren't the latter!

 

[roadhunter]

Most that brag about out-towing new diesels with their old lightly modded diesels also brag about getting superhuman MPG numbers out of their diesels. Glad to see you aren't the latter!

Not sure why you have a hard time believing that some of the older Cummins engines get better mileage than the new diesels but they do. I think it hurts the feelings of folks who spend $50k+ for a truck and have less power and mileage than a guy in an old Dodge. I hope you are not one of those people.

 

[94BULLITT]

I've got a lead foot and test the modern competition out all the time. If it's stock and not chipped, I'll smoke em. Loaded, unloaded, up hill, etc...

What's really fun is when a gasser with a load tries to hang with me up hills and I slow down so they can catch up and then leave em again.

...so some modern diesel owners will say "I can buy a chip and get 100hp." First off, you can't. Theres real hp gains but not the 100hp listed on the box. With a 12v, I CAN get new injectors and a bigger charger and see REAL WORLD 200+hp. I also get to sell my old charger for a TON!

The point isn't to say how weak the newer stuff is, because it's not. I even like the dreaded 6.0 stroke, but it's a real testament to the staying ability of a truly superior platform Cummins has.

You aren't like this old guy I know are you? He gets in 2 or 3 "races" everyday to and from work. The only problem the people he is the people he is "racing" don't know they are in a race. He drives a 4 cylinder S-10, I don't think there is anything much slower on the road.

 

[fordmantpw]

Not sure why you have a hard time believing that some of the older Cummins engines get better mileage than the new diesels but they do. I think it hurts the feelings of folks who spend $50k+ for a truck and have less power and mileage than a guy in an old Dodge. I hope you are not one of those people.

I don't have a problem believing that at all...in fact, I KNOW they do. I drive an '08 6.4L Ford...it's fuel mileage is less than stellar.

What I DO have trouble believing is these guys that chip their diesel and then brag about how they are pulling down nearly 30 MPG empty and 22+ MPG loaded with 10k lbs behind them. I've heard several of those stories, and I know they are full of crap!

However, I will put the newest offerings from the big 3 against anything from 20 years ago for towing. I think the new DPF engines have resolved most of the issues of the early DPF engines and they are making incredible power while still getting great fuel economy. I'm sure an older Cummins 12V can still come close or match the new engines for mileage, but there's no way it can out-tow one of the newer diesels. It just ain't gonna happen unless it is crazy tuned putting out gobs of torque. Still, I would take the modern engine for safety of the engine, as well as the driver.

 

[sacmarata]

I don't have a problem believing that at all...in fact, I KNOW they do. I drive an '08 6.4L Ford...it's fuel mileage is less than stellar.

What I DO have trouble believing is these guys that chip their diesel and then brag about how they are pulling down nearly 30 MPG empty and 22+ MPG loaded with 10k lbs behind them. I've heard several of those stories, and I know they are full of crap!

However, I will put the newest offerings from the big 3 against anything from 20 years ago for towing. I think the new DPF engines have resolved most of the issues of the early DPF engines and they are making incredible power while still getting great fuel economy. I'm sure an older Cummins 12V can still come close or match the new engines for mileage, but there's no way it can out-tow one of the newer diesels. It just ain't gonna happen unless it is crazy tuned putting out gobs of torque. Still, I would take the modern engine for safety of the engine, as well as the driver.

I didn't intend for this to turn into a this vs that thread and apologise to the OP if it has taken on that vibe. I too have heard the stories about towing even 26,000lbs and geting 20+mpg. Most of em are young kids who just wanna talk. I have done an honest 24mpg empty before so I wouldnt doubt some of the 28mpg stories though. I don't see how because mine is a light single cab, but hey who knows. As far as towing ability, I stand by my claims on the old lightly moded 12v. Stock vs stock, the newer trucks would spank it, but with no fuel plate, timing advanced 16* and a triple disk with manual lockup....thats pretty hard to beat...especially coming from 5.9 displacement.

I'm not a brand basher. Like I said before, I even like the dreaded 6.0 Powerstroke. Once bulletproofed, it's a great engine.

 

[sacmarata]

You aren't like this old guy I know are you? He gets in 2 or 3 "races" everyday to and from work. The only problem the people he is the people he is "racing" don't know they are in a race. He drives a 4 cylinder S-10, I don't think there is anything much slower on the road.

Where I live diesels are king and it seems every highschool kid gets a shiny new diesel when they turn 16. Driving a diesel, when around town, I get challenged at nearly every red light. Mostly, I just enjoy knowing my tranny and TC will last forever if I don't beat on em too much, but every now and then, if I see a stock pipe on the kids truck, I'll give em a run for their money. I like watching the look on their face when I lockup at 45 mph fully spooled up and walk away from their $45,000 truck with my grandpa truck sporting a topper. I don't doubt some of the newer ones are pushing more HP stock than I am lightly modded, but I can lockup when I want and put all the torque on the ground. It's pretty hard to hang with from 45mph to 70mph.

 

[fordmantpw]

I didn't intend for this to turn into a this vs that thread and apologise to the OP if it has taken on that vibe. I too have heard the stories about towing even 26,000lbs and geting 20+mpg. Most of em are young kids who just wanna talk. I have done an honest 24mpg empty before so I wouldnt doubt some of the 28mpg stories though. I don't see how because mine is a light single cab, but hey who knows. As far as towing ability, I stand by my claims on the old lightly moded 12v. Stock vs stock, the newer trucks would spank it, but with no fuel plate, timing advanced 16* and a triple disk with manual lockup....thats pretty hard to beat...especially coming from 5.9 displacement.

I'm not a brand basher. Like I said before, I even like the dreaded 6.0 Powerstroke. Once bulletproofed, it's a great engine.

I probably came off a little brash and didn't mean to take things off topic either, and for that I apologize.

The 6.0 PowerStroke was really a black eye for Ford. Like you said, though, once bulletproofed, it's great. The 6.4L is much better, it's fuel economy just sucks due to the DPF, EGR, and other EPA goodies. The 6.7L is turning out to be a great engine, and I think the '15 models are going to be even better due to changes in the turbo as well as beefing up the tranny.

Now, I think we can agree that there is nothing cooler than a highly modded Cummins rolling coal dragging a sled down the tracks! That is a blast to watch (and listen to)!

 

[aczlan]

Just a note, I heard back from James Menzies (who wrote the article) and the Ford/Dodge were 2014 model year trucks. He also said "They admitted they had to use rentals as the competition isn't always eager to provide trucks for these types of comparisons!"

Aaron Z

 

[handirifle]

Just a note, I heard back from James Menzies (who wrote the article) and the Ford/Dodge were 2014 model year trucks. He also said "They admitted they had to use rentals as the competition isn't always eager to provide trucks for these types of comparisons!"

Aaron Z

Coming from a GM guy, I have to admit, that's pretty sad. Poor journalism, in my opinion. No telling what the condition of either of the older trucks was. But hey, if it's on the internet, it has to be true, right?