Help me decide, 3 trucks I need to pick 1 from.

[Hay Dude]

Well yes, Cummins can be modified to no end with cubic dollars. But we had Dodge duallies at same time as F350's with 7.3's and the Dodges were slugs.

Definitely slower.
An empty or lightly loaded V-8 will win a race over a straight 6 pretty much nearly every time.

But hook max weight up, and the 6 will out-pull, nearly every time.

Since trucks were designed to carry/pull weight, the straight six is a more sensible choice in a truck. Plus it’ll get better fuel economy.

I was sitting at a light, trailer in tow behind my Ram and up pulls an empty 6.7L powerstroke. The guy gave me the look down his nose and proceeded to attempt to impress me by dusting me with his truck.

His truck was fast, but it didn’t impress me. Looked like the type that used his truck to pull a trailer hitch and not much more.

 

[Hay Dude]

@haydude I’m a big fan of classic Mopars. The 426 Hemi is a legend for many reasons but simple isn’t one. First off the horsepower and torque numbers were gross not net, take at least 10 to 15% off those numbers. They had dual 4 barrel carbs, solid lifter cam and dual point distributor. Not easy to keep running sharp. Very tough to compare old vs. new.

Exactly my point. 50 years later and Ford can’t make an engine with more torque than a 1969, 50 year old, smaller displacement 426 hemi? More reliable, yeah ok I’ll give you that. But 50 years is a long time to keep making gas engines with 450 tq.
BTW 490 ft lbs gross, is 450ft bls net. Thats the same as the amazing Godzilla.

I bet the new 6.7 Cummins Octane will show them how its done.
I mean just look at this: A 6.7L gasser that makes 660 ft lbs of torque.

This engine has Ford & GM quaking in their boots! I bet GM brings back the 366/427 tall decks just to try to compete! lol

 

[deserteagle71]

I hope that 6.7 Cummins gasser is a winner. I really mean that.

BUT - I always say I'm not going to be a beta tester for new technology. Let's see what the reliability figures are, 5 years after this engine hits the market and people start working it. The old 5.9 Cummins and 7.3 Powerstroke put out low power numbers stock. Those low power numbers were also what made them so reliable. Simple engines making low power. Begin modifying them for more power and reliability began going down. I'd like to know where Cummins derived all that power in that new 6.7 gasser? I'll bet its mainly electronics and maybe turbos, variable valve timing, cam phasars. And where is that 660 lb-ft of torque coming in on the torque curve? The diesel makes all its torque below 2000 rpm - will that gas engine make its torque there, or will it be at 4500 rpm like most gas engines? Whatever, its factory mods for more power and I'll wait and see just how reliable that engine is, in the long run. After people start using it pulling a 20,000 lb trailer for 300,000 miles.

I think Ford's relatively low power numbers for the 7.3 gasser are due to that it is, compared to most engines today, relatively simple. Wouldn't take much to get some awesome power numbers out of that engine, as I understand some tuners are already doing. Could Ford make that engine a lot more powerful? Sure. But keeping it simple and low power makes it more reliable as a day to day workhorse. I'm never going to buy one...at my age, my Dodge/Cummins trucks will outlive me. But so far 98% of the Ford 7.3 gasser owners report being very pleased with the engine, and that means something.

 

[D&D]

Well, they were a powerhouse at the time they were being put in trucks. It's just that everything since is publishing huge numbers now. Even the old 5.9 Cummins of those days were no stronger. But they were also very reliable.

1985 W900 with 350hp got the job done
2023 Pete 389 with 565hp gets the job done a little faster

Neither one what you'd really term fuel efficient. And with diesel averaging $1.00 per gallon more than gas. Another reason why retail prices are escalating.

 

[Paystar]

I'm not getting involved in the Ford/Ram/GM/Cummins fanboy stuff.

I buy and drive what works for me, LOL

And luckily I don't need to sled pull or race Corvettes with my one ton truck, LOL

 

[Paystar]

1985 W900 with 350hp got the job done
2023 Pete 389 with 565hp gets the job done a little faster

Neither one what you'd really term fuel efficient. And with diesel averaging $1.00 per gallon more than gas. Another reason why retail prices are escalating.

I spend a good number of years tugging 140,000 pounds up 7 to 10% hills with a 350 Mack that had 1200 lb-ft, LOL

These new pickups claim that much for torque now, LOL

Used to take me 3 hours to go from Sault Ste. Marie to Wawa. Now it's 2.5 with 600 horse/1850 torque.

 

[D&D]

I spend a good number of years tugging 140,000 pounds up 7 to 10% hills with a 350 Mack that had 1200 lb-ft, LOL

A little grade always makes it easy to spot the "old" trucks

 

[Paystar]

A little grade always makes it easy to spot the "old" trucks

I'd still rather have the old trucks. And my opinion today is the highways would be a safer place. You wouldn't have seat covers doing 70 MPH in their loaded big power, automatic transmission big rigs flying down the highway.
Back then we had to DRIVE the trucks, speeds were lower and you had to know how to judge and plan your braking because engine brakes were weak and/or non-existent. So if you didn't know how to preserve your brakes, you were going to die.

 

[deserteagle71]

And with diesel averaging $1.00 per gallon more than gas.

You just live in the wrong part of the country and are being ripped off. For the past several years diesel here has been a little bit cheaper than gas and just recently inched up so now its about the same price as regular.

 

[D&D]

I'd still rather have the old trucks. And my opinion today is the highways would be a safer place. You wouldn't have seat covers doing 70 MPH in their loaded big power, automatic transmission big rigs flying down the highway.
Back then we had to DRIVE the trucks, speeds were lower and you had to know how to judge and plan your braking because engine brakes were weak and/or non-existent. So if you didn't know how to preserve your brakes, you were going to die.

Back then, it wasn't a race to get in front of the big truck and IMO, people didnt want to get smashed by the big truck. Now, it seems like everybody wants to win the insurance lottery.

 

[D&D]

You just live in the wrong part of the country and are being ripped off. For the past several years diesel here has been a little bit cheaper than gas and just recently inched up so now its about the same price as regular.

View attachment 3773769

Hmmm
Regular Midgrade Premium Diesel
$2.95 $3.43 $3.85 $3.89

 

[paulsharvey]

By “hype” I’m talking about the guys who hype them up to be so unbelievably powerful.
The “godzilla” is a 444 cubic inch engine that makes less torque than a 426 hemi (490 ft lbs) from 50 years ago, and is a lot more complicated.
That’s what I mean by “hype”.
Why is that so great?

Oh come on, that 426 from 50 years ago wasnt going to last 200,000 miles; with just oil changes and brake jobs. The 7.3L, 8.1L, ect can and generally do. You can probably squeeze those numbers from a built 4.3L V6, for 10,000 miles, or a 5.0 for 100,000; but not for 5-10 years of reliable service. Heck, we can probably get a 1.8L Honda upto 500 hp, for 50-100 miles...

 

[paulsharvey]

Well, they were a powerhouse at the time they were being put in trucks. It's just that everything since is publishing huge numbers now. Even the old 5.9 Cummins of those days were no stronger. But they were also very reliable.

We had a work truck, around 04' I think model, Ram 2500, 5.9L Cummins. Weighed about 11,000#, between tools, junk, pipe rakes, generators, ect; but the throttle, you had basically two positions, foot off, or foot all the way down. You had to peddle all the way down to get on the road, thing had like 350hp/600 ft #.


Edit: specs are actually Way worse

 

[Hay Dude]

Oh come on, that 426 from 50 years ago wasnt going to last 200,000 miles; with just oil changes and brake jobs.

Why not? Plenty of collector 426 powered cars still out there. Is a 2025 truck going 200,000 on just oil changes and brake jobs? Maybe some, but no way 200k without new brakes.

I’ll give you the increase in reliability, but everyone’s bragging on the power.
I’m sorry, but 420/450 is really unimpressive after 50 years of building essentially the same big V-8’s.

The 7.3L, 8.1L, ect can and generally do. You can probably squeeze those numbers from a built 4.3L V6, for 10,000 miles, or a 5.0 for 100,000; but not for 5-10 years of reliable service. Heck, we can probably get a 1.8L Honda upto 500 hp, for 50-100 miles...

Good luck with a “500HP 1.8L” in a truck. Tell me how that works out for ya on anything other than a dyno.

You guys crack me up. You pay $80,000 for a truck that makes same torque as engines available 50 years ago and act like they’re amazing.
More reliable? Yeah, ok. But for $80,000? A humongous 7.3L gas engine makes the same torque as a 2004 Cummins 5.9L diesel, but it has to rev much higher sucks down way more fuel.

I don’t see that as progress. Cummins will save the gas engine. You’ll see.

 

[Hay Dude]

We had a work truck, around 04' I think model, Ram 2500, 5.9L Cummins. Weighed about 11,000#, between tools, junk, pipe rakes, generators, ect; but the throttle, you had basically two positions, foot off, or foot all the way down. You had to peddle all the way down to get on the road, thing had like 350hp/600 ft #.

So with an ambient load of 11,000 on a 3/4 ton truck, you are wondering why 350/600 wasn’t very fast?????

Edit: specs are actually Way worseView attachment 3774412

And that truck could be modified for double or triple that rating without much trouble. Those engines were underrated because the transmissions of that era weren’t up to the task.

Transmission advances are a big reason diesel torque numbers are in the 800-1100 range in small trucks.

Other components are catching up. Front ends/suspensions, brakes, etc.

 

[paulsharvey]

We routinely run work vehicles, gas engines all, too 200k and generally its oil changes and brakes, and thats it. Mine had a transmission flush at 175k. We have had issues on Fords with the Infotainment system. Take them in, and company says "we aren't paying $1500 to fix a radio", we'll, its not a radio, its your AC, cameras, crash warning, ect.

Even a 1980s vehicle; 200k would be the exception, and likely would have had tune up every 50k, u-joints, shocks, alternator, plugs, and likely more. We dont even generally replace belts within that 200k, and often dont need an alignment.

Now, I have Zero experience with 1960s stuff; but 80s and early 90s; people forget just how underpowered 350s, 360s, 5.8L, really are. Yes, Ford 4.9L were good for their time, but they are dogs against even a 2.4L I4 from today, in weight, power, durability, ect. Heck, look at a "hi output" 454 BB; put that against even a 3.6L V6 dodge

 

[paulsharvey]

So, late 2019, I was looking for a truck, after driving a very tired 2003 Toyota Highlander for the better part of 6 years or so. I had sold my 2005 2500HD 6.0L, and I actually did search for a 2005 Silverado SS, AWD, 6.0L High Output... but ended up with a used 2019 Ram 1500, 4x4. That SS was bad ads in 2005; but its numbers are a joke by 2019. Still a cool truck, but 345 hp, 10ish MPG, 0-60 in 6.5s vs 395 hp, and 19ish MPG, 0-60 in 6.5 sec; and thats the top of the line, flagship sport edition vs a run of the mile, basic truck.

 

[Hay Dude]

Who, other than hot rodders, buys trucks for horsepower & speed?
I have nothing against racing trucks, its cool.

IMO, todays truck manufacturers are catering to young guys who want 500HP.

The practicality aspect has been thrown overboard for one-upsmanship in 0-60 race times.

 

[D&D]

Maybe some, but no way 200k without new brakes.

When we did tow trucks, one of the guys we hired could put 350000 on a set of brakes. He never used them He was one of those guys that looped around traffic lights, wrong way on one ways...had to take the phone #s off his truck cuz we got so many calls about him
These days, he just fits in with most of the other drivers on the road.

 

[Hay Dude]

When we did tow trucks, one of the guys we hired could put 350000 on a set of brakes. He never used them He was one of those guys that looped around traffic lights, wrong way on one ways...had to take the phone #s off his truck cuz we got so many calls about him
These days, he just fits in with most of the other drivers on the road.

With my exhaust brake on my Ram, at 67,000 miles at my state inspection in April, I had over 50% brakes remaining.

Improved Transmissions and turbocharged diesel engines are leading the way.
Now it’s time to get away from 7-8L gas engines, and start turbocharging in line 6 cylinder gas engines.
My wife has a twin turbo six in a BMW X-5 and it’s got tremendous low end torque.