looking at a 09 superduty 6.4L powerstroke

[slowzuki]

397/400 hp? Who cares? Its all more than most of us need. BTW the 4x4 Ford's actually have 6000 lb front axles, but are limited by the tires installed, likely the same as chev. I happen to like solid axles but lots of folks like the IFS setups.

I've never liked the chev IFS but a close friend of mine loves his. He finds the increased maintenance vs the solid axle is worth it for the nice plush ride. To be fair, he only spends about 400$ a year on front end parts for a truck that is used to plow with in the winter.

 

[Soundguy]

i'd love to see an affordable diesel half ton.

when my dodge 5.9l gasser finally dies.. I want to replace it with an every day driver diesel. had originally been considering a 5-10yr old f350 v8d for durability.. but it's not super practicle. would love to see a half ton pickup diesel in affordable range especially a dodge ram. I like my ram truck.. the layout..e tc. could even do with a regular cab.. don't need to be extended.

soundguy

 

[MikePA]

Sales figures are more a measure of the company's ability to MARKET a product more successfully than the competition.

Good marketing can sell a bad product only once. If people keep buying the product it's because they like it and find value in it.

 

[Dargo]

John I think it's because Cummins has traditionally had the longest B50 rating of the 3 diesel engines at 350,000 miles.

Interesting. The plant isn't that far from my house and the uncle of one of my employees has worked on the Dodge/Cummins relationship since the late 80's in an engineering capacity. Cummins rates the average and expected (with normal maintenance) of the 5.9 at 500k and 15 years and the 6.7 at 410k and 15 years. They used to keep a nice "club" of Dodge owners who passed the million mile mark with their 5.9 Cummins powered pickups, but it's become so common that there isn't anything particularly special about such stories. My two relatives who have worked at the Ford truck plant in Louisville said the 7.3 was supposed to make it to 250k (again with normal maintenance) before a rebuild. Anymore, 250k isn't anything special for many gasoline engines. I'll admit I've never bothered to do the math, but I'm not even sure that the slight bump in fuel economy would pay for the diesel engine surcharge at 250k. Makes me sad to see the V10 go. I heard figures between 200 to 250k tossed around for it. Can't say I've heard any average life figures for the 6.4.

 

[Builder]

397/400 hp? Who cares? Its all more than most of us need. BTW the 4x4 Ford's actually have 6000 lb front axles, but are limited by the tires installed, likely the same as chev. I happen to like solid axles but lots of folks like the IFS setups.

I agree with that much HP, "who cares", but that's not my point. It's the way they direct the advertising that I don't like. It's like we are left in the dark about the real power of the truck. Why not list rear wheel HP at a certain RPM with the TC locked? does Ford actually believe they have "the most diesel horsepower" as their ads say, when in fact, on the rollers they make less rear wheel horsepower than the competition?

Let me make it simpler: Let's say you have 2 identical trucks with only a few minor differences. One has 400 flywheel HP and say 320 RWHP. The other has 397 flywheel HP and 340 RWHP. Wouldn't a smart person take the truck with more RWHP and leave the truck with the 400 flywheel HP to the braggers and kids on the internet?

BTW: My F-350 SRW 4x4 only had a 5,400lb front GAWR and a dana 50 front axle.

I've never liked the chev IFS but a close friend of mine loves his. He finds the increased maintenance vs the solid axle is worth it for the nice plush ride. To be fair, he only spends about 400$ a year on front end parts for a truck that is used to plow with in the winter.

That's about what I spent on ball joints per year for ford. I agree with your buddy. I'd rather have the nice ride for the 95% of the time we use trucks over the road than the SFA for the 5% of the time I plow of off-road. If I was a pure off roader and I had to have a stock truck, then Ford would be a better choice.

 

[Builder]

Good marketing can sell a bad product only once. If people keep buying the product it's because they like it and find value in it.

Which seems to work more towards my thinking. Even with McD's food being bad, people keep coming back and buying the same crappy cheeseburgers over & over, even though the recipe never changes. Reason is because they do a GREAT job of marketing their food through advertising & availability more than actually making quality food. So yes, people will buy the same poor product over & over is the product is well marketed. McD's is an iconic example.

If someone buys a Ford truck and doesn't like it, they keep it for years, then trade it for a different brand. By then, many new customers become able to buy. Ford does a great job of changing the looks of their trucks often and has a lot of dealerships to serve their customers. I always thought GM was slower to change and freshen their line-up to a new look.

I'm not saying Ford makes a bad truck, I'm saying I think Ford does a great job at marketing and keeping their slight sales lead. How does that slight sales lead equate to being a better truck ??? Yet that's what ford shoves in your face on EVERY F-150 ad they run on radio/TV.

Does a real deep thinking person believe that small sales lead makes Ford a superior truck?

 

[MikePA]

Which seems to work more towards my thinking.

No, it doesn't.

 

[Builder]

Whatever you say.

 

[MikePA]

Whatever you say.

It's real simple. You claim the only reason Ford sells more trucks is solely due to marketing. You're wrong.

 

[Builder]

It's real simple. You claim the only reason Ford sells more trucks is solely due to marketing. You're wrong.

Where did I say "Ford sells more trucks soley due to marketing" MikePA?