And the HP Wars Begin

[Lt CHEG]

Another reason to stick to the tried and proven Cummins diesel RAM with no Diesel Exhaust Fluid required and 350hp/650lb.ft. :thumbsup:

While simple is nice, I don't see the Cummins' lack of exhaust fluid as a good thing. Adding the urea injection to the Duramax seems to have significantly increased its fuel economy in an era where gasoline engines are getting better fuel economy than their diesel counterparts. Heck the hemi in my Durango G-Ride gets better gas mileage than the Cummins I test drove a month or so ago. Now I'd love to see what the Cummins could do with a urea injection system. It has always been a great performer and did so with excellent fuel economy, I'll bet the Cummins could beat out Ford and GM's diesels in fuel economy if they were to add urea injection.

 

[Dmace]

While simple is nice, I don't see the Cummins' lack of exhaust fluid as a good thing. Adding the urea injection to the Duramax seems to have significantly increased its fuel economy in an era where gasoline engines are getting better fuel economy than their diesel counterparts. Heck the hemi in my Durango G-Ride gets better gas mileage than the Cummins I test drove a month or so ago. Now I'd love to see what the Cummins could do with a urea injection system. It has always been a great performer and did so with excellent fuel economy, I'll bet the Cummins could beat out Ford and GM's diesels in fuel economy if they were to add urea injection.

Well I have yet to see any real world test prove that Urea Injection (Diesel Exhaust Fluid) actually improves fuel mileage. Plus, even if it did add a less than substantial increase in fuel mileage, that would quickly be offset by the fact that these trucks have about an 8-10 gallon tank (9.3lbs per US gal.) for the DEF that reduces the trucks payload plus you need to refill this tank at 3500-4500 mile intervals at a projected price of approx. $2.75 a gallon. Add to that the extra step of watching the levels of this DEF and having to find a station to refill it once it gets low.

The RAM cab-chassis (3500/4500/5500) Cummins powered trucks will get the DEF injection since it's much cheaper to add-on than the EGR system but the RAM 2500/3500 will continue to use the more expensive maintenance-free EGR system. It will be the only new truck with the EGR system since the other diesel manufacturers can't meet the more strict EPA regulations with EGR like the Cummins.

 

[Willl]

DEF is injected in to exhaust just before the CC thingy. The engine don't burn any of it.

How could it increase fuel mileage ?

 

[Dmace]

DEF is injected in to exhaust just before the CC thingy. The engine don't burn any of it.

How could it increase fuel mileage ?

Well with an EGR system, a portion of the exhaust is "recirculated" back into the engine to be "re-burnt" and needs to be filtered in the exhaust. When the EGR system regens, the ECU dumps extra fuel into the system to clean the particulate filter in the exhaust. This dumping of extra fuel is unnecessary with DEF but it is hardly a large amount so I doubt the DEF will make that much of an improvement. Only time will tell...

 

[jesnic]

I have an 02 dodge cummins. I am pushing around 550hp, maybe a little more. I get 22 mpg if I just cruise at 70 mph. Pulling 8,000 lbs. I get about 17 mpg still going 70 mph. The new ford is extremely expensive and extremely nice, but if you bought a cummins and saved $10K and spent about $5K on aftermarket performance mods, you could have a truck with way more power than the ford, better mileage and $5K left in your pocket. I will keep my truck till the wheels fall off, then put a new set on and keep going. The new trucks sure are nice, but WOW they are expensive.

 

[Lt CHEG]

I have an 02 dodge cummins. I am pushing around 550hp, maybe a little more. I get 22 mpg if I just cruise at 70 mph. Pulling 8,000 lbs. I get about 17 mpg still going 70 mph. The new ford is extremely expensive and extremely nice, but if you bought a cummins and saved $10K and spent about $5K on aftermarket performance mods, you could have a truck with way more power than the ford, better mileage and $5K left in your pocket. I will keep my truck till the wheels fall off, then put a new set on and keep going. The new trucks sure are nice, but WOW they are expensive.

While there may be merit to your option of buying used and upgrading, this discussion is about new models. I know in my case, I am not interested in buying used as I prefer to pretty much always buy new. Also there are some features on the new trucks that I much prefer to the older ones. For example a 2002 Dodge for example didn't really have a crew cab option, which is something that I require, while the 2011 Dodge, GM and Ford trucks all have a very nice, very roomy true crew cab.

You could also argue that one could buy a used Duramax or Power Stroke and invest heavily in performance modifications and save a ton of money over new. So the Cummins is not unique in that regard. Also I have no interest in heavily modifying any new truck that I buy as one of the reasons why I like to buy new is to have a warranty. I don't do things that void warranties. Also even if I bought one of the DPF bypass kits for the Dodge Cummins and it brought back a large amount of the fuel economy loss, it would mean that I would have to take it off and reinstall it every year before and after my vehicle inspection. This is not something that I am interested in doing, not even thinking about the legality.

Lastly, I'm well aware of the capabilities of the older Cummins engines. My uncle has a 2000 Ram with the Cummins and it is a great engine. His is modified slightly and it's turning out great power and also delivering 20 mpg unloaded on the highway, better if he could drive at a reasonable speed. He's also on his 5th transmission which is not uncommon with CTD's of that era, but that is beside the point. As I've said before the Cummins is the best diesel engine out there as far as I'm concerned. It's a true medium duty truck engine in a light duty truck. Its straight 6 configuration gives better access and it seems easier to work on by all accounts. However if the new Cummins engines do not do something to increase their fuel economy then that is a huge weakness in my eyes. If that means not using the platinum catalyzed EGR system and instead going to urea injection then I am all for it, and would consider a CTD. However, when Dodge is getting 15 mpg highway unloaded with an EGR system (even if it is simpler) and Ford and GM are doing better than 20 mpg highway unloaded (as verified by numerous real world testers on various forums and print magazines in the case of the Ford) then there is just no way that a CTD will work for me. I don't keep my trucks long enough to worry about extreme long term reliability, but getting good fuel economy is extremely important to me. So for now, Dodge and Cummins just do not offer the combination of features that I need. As I said in my previous post, if Dodge was able to get the fuel economy above 20 mpg highway, even if that meant going to a exhaust fluid injection system then that would be a huge step in the right direction for me. Based upon the reaction of others on this forum at the disappointing fuel economy of newer diesels I would wager that I'm not alone in that regard either.

 

[jesnic]

Very good points. I on the other hand have no need for the true 4 doors as my kids are grown and off to college. I also don't want to have a truck payment. My wife just bought a new Honda. It gets great mileage, but the payment I could do without. I figure I will eventually by another diesel truck, but for now, I will just wait it out and let the big three fight.

 

[Raspy]

Mileage may be improved somewhat with DEF because manufacturers have had to use EGR and retarded ignition to reduce NOX. These two things also reduce mileage and power. So, hopefully with DEF, they will be able to reduce the amount of EGR a bit and advance the timng a bit and still meet the emissions requirements. DEF converts NOX to nitrogen and water, so if a bit more is made in the engine, it may not matter with DEF.

DEF freezes at 12* F and the amount used is approximately 2-3% of diesel fuel. Cost should be between $2. and $3.

My '04 Dodge with the 305 engine was the last of the good mileage, no catalytic converter engines and I'm sticking with it. 04.5s with the cats marked the beginning of lower mileage by a small amount. Then the 6.7 Cummins with EGR and DPF got worse again. Next is the DEF engines with even more complication and we'll see about the mileage.

What a mess. Using more and more fuel, and requiring more and more complication and expense, seems counterproductive.

 

[Dmace]

What a mess. Using more and more fuel, and requiring more and more complication and expense, seems counterproductive.

So true! That's what the EPA is all about, a bunch of loud mouths with no real education or engineering experience...
Yeah it emits 25% less emissions but uses 50% more fuel, real bright! :mur:

 

[Diamondpilot]

I could never understand it either. That is the primary reason I have held on to my 04 and 06 Powerstrokes. They both turn in 17mpg average and can do low 20's on the highway. Neither has any fancy emission stuff and both have needed nothing but routine maintenance.

The simple fact is they will not last forever so sooner or later I will have to buy something different. Maybe in 2 years or so they will have them all figured out and we will be back to where we started.

Chris

 

[TheGoose]

I heard that chevy was re-starting their 'baby duramax' for light duty trucks. 4.5L, 300 HP, 500ish foot-lbs, and will fit in any engine bay that a small block V-8 will fit in. Supposed to get mid 20's in fuel economy. Don't know about DEF (urea).

I hope they get it right.

 

[sbohan]

Ford's midsize diesel is already in the works, expect them in F150's before too long. So 20's in a real nice half ton. After the initial I'll get one of those. No more lines to give away my cash.

 

[Raspy]

I hope they get it right too, and they probably will with a few glitches in the beginning.

We are so overdue for a smaller sized diesel.

 

[Lt CHEG]

I heard that chevy was re-starting their 'baby duramax' for light duty trucks. 4.5L, 300 HP, 500ish foot-lbs, and will fit in any engine bay that a small block V-8 will fit in. Supposed to get mid 20's in fuel economy. Don't know about DEF (urea).

I hope they get it right.

I'd even take that in a 3/4 ton truck. Heck I'd strongly consider buying a 3/4 ton GM if I could get the same 5.3 V8 and 3.42 rear end combo that my current 1/2 ton truck has. My truck puts out more horsepower and torque than a big block did 15 years ago and those trucks had enough to get the job done as long as you could be a little patient and not drive while towing as if you were driving a sports car. In reality my truck tows my loads just fine, particularly with respect to power. I would just love to have a truck that gets equal or slightly better mileage to my current truck with a little bit beefier rear end as my 1/2 ton squats a little more with a max load than I would prefer on longer trips. I sincerely hope that this smaller diesel makes it to market as it would be EXACTLY what myself and a bunch of other people would be looking for. I know a lot of people who owned older diesels ONLY because they got better fuel economy.

 

[RobertN]

Would be nice to see options. 300hp and 500ft lb is more than the 3/4 tons were making just a few years ago.

How about 225HP or so, 400ftlbs, and 30+MPG... It's a 1/2 ton after all...

It would be kinda nice if they offered that option in 25/35 series trucks too. Granted, most folks would probably go for the HP over mileage, but it would be nice to at least have the option.

I heard that chevy was re-starting their 'baby duramax' for light duty trucks. 4.5L, 300 HP, 500ish foot-lbs, and will fit in any engine bay that a small block V-8 will fit in. Supposed to get mid 20's in fuel economy. Don't know about DEF (urea).

I hope they get it right.

 

[Lt CHEG]

Frankly I don't know why there aren't more diesel options in the truck industry. Well, I'm sure some of it is cost, diesels will always be more expensive to produce than gas engines. However I would think that economies of scale would eventually kick in and bring costs down somewhat if more diesel engines were being produced. I'd love to see something along the lines of a small diesel for half tons, and possibly smaller trucks if it would fit, that would produce around 235 to 250 horsepower and around 350 to 400 lbs ft of torque while delivering 30 mpg highway unloaded and able to pull around 7,000 pounds. I'd also like to see a 300 horsepower 500 lb ft of torque engine for half ton and 3/4 ton trucks that will deliver 23 to 25 mpg highway unloaded while able to tow 10,000 pounds with tall (maybe 3.42) gears and maybe up to 12,000 pounds bumper pull on a 3/4 ton using slightly lower gearing, but still be 20 to 22 mpg highway unloaded. Then of course you can keep the monsters that we have now for the absolute biggest loads. I think Ford may be in the best position to pull this off as well. Since they are the only company building their own diesel added to the fact that they have experience building modular motors. They may be able to get everything working right if the new Scorpion Power Stroke ends up being a success. I'm really hoping that we'll see some smaller diesels in the next 2 years or so.

 

[Diamondpilot]

Again they were very close to the numbers you are siting a few years back. I have a 2004 F-250 4x4 that turn in 17 mixed every tank and as good as high 23's on the highway. This is with a chip, 4" exhaust, and an intake system. I have a 06 F-350 that is the same. Both trucks have 3.73 gears and can pull 16,000# Both are making well over 500HP and 725 FT LB TQ.


I had a 2005 Dmax 4x4 with 3.73 gears that did a honest 15 in town and 20 to 21 on the highway with no modifications at all. This truck had 310HP and 590 FT LB TQ if I remember right. I only had it for about 9 months.

The EPA has doomed the mpg war for the time being. Maybe this new Ford will be a winner but I will hold on for a year or two to see how they shake out.

Chris

 

[schmism]

anyone else get the feeling its "all on paper"

kinda like the briggs and stratton debacle.

 

[Renze]

anyone else get the feeling its "all on paper"

kinda like the briggs and stratton debacle.

In Europe theres a big rig HP war going on. MAN introduced a 680 hp, 3000Nm truck. Volvo introduced a 700hp, 3100Nm truck. MAN uses the ZF transmission which ZF warrants for 3000Nm max, so they bumped the hp but not the torque. Scania now brags about their new V8 of 730hp and 3500Nm, but the 3500Nm is only available in the highest 3 gears... So indeed, this is all on paper.
I'm not really into Nascar, but somebody once said, "horsepower sells cars, but torque wins races"

About smaller diesels, i hauled a load of scrap to the recycler this morning, weighing in at 9300 pounds combined weight, on the scales. With 140hp and 300Nm i can keep up with the other traffic when shifting at 2700rpm, keeping it between 1900 and 2700rpm, right in the middle of the engine torque band. 5th gear is too tall, but cruising 80km/h at 2000rpm in 4th is a good rpm to maintain power and fuel economy. The engine torque curve is what matters most, hp doesnt mean much.
I only wish for stronger rear springs... perhaps change them for those of the Estate version...

 

[TheGoose]

Ford's midsize diesel is already in the works, expect them in F150's before too long. So 20's in a real nice half ton. After the initial I'll get one of those. No more lines to give away my cash.

Good. The more competition, the better. I would now like to see a MPG war. The HP war is/has been over for years.

I hope they get it right too, and they probably will with a few glitches in the beginning.

We are so overdue for a smaller sized diesel.

Yes.

I'd even take that in a 3/4 ton truck. Heck I'd strongly consider buying a 3/4 ton GM if I could get the same 5.3 V8 and 3.42 rear end combo that my current 1/2 ton truck has. My truck puts out more horsepower and torque than a big block did 15 years ago and those trucks had enough to get the job done as long as you could be a little patient and not drive while towing as if you were driving a sports car. In reality my truck tows my loads just fine, particularly with respect to power. I would just love to have a truck that gets equal or slightly better mileage to my current truck with a little bit beefier rear end as my 1/2 ton squats a little more with a max load than I would prefer on longer trips. I sincerely hope that this smaller diesel makes it to market as it would be EXACTLY what myself and a bunch of other people would be looking for. I know a lot of people who owned older diesels ONLY because they got better fuel economy.

I heard GM is going to offer the baby duramax in all trucks, 1/2 to 1 Tons. They had to do this to be able to get it to market. The big Duramax will be an option, the smaller one std.

Would be nice to see options. 300hp and 500ft lb is more than the 3/4 tons were making just a few years ago.

How about 225HP or so, 400ftlbs, and 30+MPG... It's a 1/2 ton after all...

It would be kinda nice if they offered that option in 25/35 series trucks too. Granted, most folks would probably go for the HP over mileage, but it would be nice to at least have the option.

Completely agree. Been saying this for years.

Frankly I don't know why there aren't more diesel options in the truck industry. Well, I'm sure some of it is cost, diesels will always be more expensive to produce than gas engines. However I would think that economies of scale would eventually kick in and bring costs down somewhat if more diesel engines were being produced. I'd love to see something along the lines of a small diesel for half tons, and possibly smaller trucks if it would fit, that would produce around 235 to 250 horsepower and around 350 to 400 lbs ft of torque while delivering 30 mpg highway unloaded and able to pull around 7,000 pounds. I'd also like to see a 300 horsepower 500 lb ft of torque engine for half ton and 3/4 ton trucks that will deliver 23 to 25 mpg highway unloaded while able to tow 10,000 pounds with tall (maybe 3.42) gears and maybe up to 12,000 pounds bumper pull on a 3/4 ton using slightly lower gearing, but still be 20 to 22 mpg highway unloaded. Then of course you can keep the monsters that we have now for the absolute biggest loads. I think Ford may be in the best position to pull this off as well. Since they are the only company building their own diesel added to the fact that they have experience building modular motors. They may be able to get everything working right if the new Scorpion Power Stroke ends up being a success. I'm really hoping that we'll see some smaller diesels in the next 2 years or so.

Agree. I think 30 MPG hwy miles unloaded would be a top seller. I would buy one. Especially if you could tow ~10K lbs.

Again they were very close to the numbers you are siting a few years back. I have a 2004 F-250 4x4 that turn in 17 mixed every tank and as good as high 23's on the highway. This is with a chip, 4" exhaust, and an intake system. I have a 06 F-350 that is the same. Both trucks have 3.73 gears and can pull 16,000# Both are making well over 500HP and 725 FT LB TQ.

I had a 2005 Dmax 4x4 with 3.73 gears that did a honest 15 in town and 20 to 21 on the highway with no modifications at all. This truck had 310HP and 590 FT LB TQ if I remember right. I only had it for about 9 months.

The EPA has doomed the mpg war for the time being. Maybe this new Ford will be a winner but I will hold on for a year or two to see how they shake out.

Chris

Would rather see less HP, less displacement, and more MPG. EPA should exempt some based on mileage.