New 1 Ton P/U on the Market. Sterling Bullet

[RobertN]

I agree. Something that got high 20's to low 30's would be nice. All the manufacturers are in the "we gotta beat the other guy" in HP, torque, 0-60 etc. It would sue beat the 16-18mpg my wifes 1/2 ton RAM with 4.7L gets.

the other side of the coin though, is why not do the same with a gas engine? All the engines out there today are new generation low emission motors. Did they give up mileage for HP though?

Part of that thought goes back to fuel differences. Around here, Diesel stay stable, albeit expensive, during the winter/spring price peaks. Gas surpassed it for a bit. Now gas is down, with diesel 40 cents a gallon more than regular in some cases.

Seems they could do an economy engine in both cases. Wonder if it would really sell though?

The more I think about it, it seems like a really dumb idea to put that much diesel engine in a 1/2 ton pickup.

That is more power than the Big 3 had in their 3/4 and 1 tons until about 2004. Think of the loads people haul with those things. Now people will try to do it with a 1/2 ton.

I'm thinking 200 hp and 400 ft-lb while getting 25+ mpg would make more sense. It would still be a horse of a pickup.

 

[Z-Michigan]

Ummm... there is an economy gas engine option for most pickups. GM has the 4.3L V6 (ancient, ancient motor) available in 2wd and I think the 4.8L V8 as base in 4wd models (ironically the 4.8L gets lower mpg than the more powerful 5.3). Dodge offers a 3.7L V6 as base, base engine in Rams, though I think hardly any of those sell. I'm sure Ford has a similar base option, I just don't pay attention to Ford. Toyota has a 4.0L V6 base option in the new full-size Tundra, and in that case it probably has enough power to get out of its own way.

IMHO, many of the base options would be fine but are handicapped by too few gears and poorly chosen axle ratios. I'd like to see 6spd autos as a minimum and 7 or 8spd more common. I'm rather disappointed that GM hasn't brought anything better than 4-speed auto to their 1/2 ton trucks and SUV's just yet. Especially when the HD models all have 6-speed transmissions now (whether 6L gas or 6.6L diesel - two different transmissions, but both are 6 speed).

 

[RobertN]

That's the problem; it would be nice to have a base option with good mileage; more than 1-2mpg better.

(ironically the 4.8L gets lower mpg than the more powerful 5.3).
IMHO, many of the base options would be fine but are handicapped by too few gears and poorly chosen axle ratios.

 

[patrick_g]

I own one - it's the Liberty CRD made only in 05 and 06.

I was tempted until I got a heads up from the dealer regarding the emissions situation and how the machine would be a potential "orphan."

Clearly from your report they work well for your mix of uses.

I remain disappointed (not alone in this either) that the MB engine used in the Sprinter didn't go into the Jeep with a good choice of trans.

The best Jeep I ever owned was a 1943 built by Ford. It was not a compromise to appeal to secretaries, socker moms, or posers who want to look TOUGH but don't really go further off road than you can walk out if need be. I used to go places frequently where a disabled vehicle was a life threatening event and although I had to get creative a few times (and lucky in others) it never failed to bring me back.

Of course with the 4 banger engine and 5.38 difs you didn't set any speed records. High cruise was about 45MPH.

Pat

 

[QRTRHRS]

The Cat is, at most, 300 lb heavier than a 6.4.

You think an extra 150 lb on each front tire is going to overdo it?

I did not realize that the 6.4 was that heavy. I went looking for some specs but found mainly articles touting it as being the best thing since sliced bread.

IMHO, based on my 97' Ram with the 900 some odd pound Cummins, having a heavy engine equates to some maintenance issues.

If you actually purchase a truck for work, weight becomes quite important. For instance, I know of owner operators who prefer a C12 over a C15 because the smaller engine meets their needs and weighs less.

I might also add that as I understand it, CAT has not, Perkins withstanding, entertained the pickup market because of the return on their investment.

Don't get me wrong, I am not biased against CAT. I drive for a living and my current ride has a 465hp C15. I have also driven trucks with the C12 and the C7, as well as the Cummins N14 and various Detroits. Of the three, the Detroit impresses me for it's ability to get up and go while yielding relatively good mileage.

My pockets are not all that deep so I need to worry about operating costs. I can remember a brief period this past spring where diesel was less than gas for the first time in many years. These days, it is business as usual. Gas is ~20 cents cheaper.

Is the added cost really worth it when you buy say an F150 or a Jeep?

 

[DieselPower]

Don't forget that Mahindra (sp?)(yes the tractor company from India) has a P/U and SUV being released in the US market in 2009. I think I read a few months ago they will also have diesels. Looks like the 2009 model year should be quite interesting for the light truck market. I know one thing for sure, you won't find me buying any of them the first year. I'll let someone else find all the problems first.

 

[KICK]

Something many of us learned in the armed forces was that if someone was incapable of judging an outfit by its performance they'd judge it by its appearance and other surface "fluff" items but they would judge it.

Pat

I didn't know that you had to join the military to learn that you cant judge a book by its cover.

chrome wont get you home but it might get you laid.

 

[Z-Michigan]

IMHO, based on my 97' Ram with the 900 some odd pound Cummins, having a heavy engine equates to some maintenance issues.

Is the added cost really worth it when you buy say an F150 or a Jeep?

I have a 2006 ram with the ISB - it weighs around 1000lbs, I think. What are the maintenance issues relating to engine weight?

I was doing some calculations last night and it looks like in a 3/4 ton, with the 2007 diesels running close to $8000 total over the gas engine, the fuel savings at $3/gal will pay off in about 6 years, based on 18,000 miles/year (what I drive). I made a bunch of assumptions and if you change those the payoff could be 3 years or 10 years or whatever. Regardless, that's a pretty long time. It would be faster if prices go up, slower if prices go down. I think a lot of people just don't like the thought of driving something that gets 10mpg, even if financially they would be as well or better off doing that instead of paying for the diesel. OTOH, having now trailed a 3-horse gooseneck with a diesel, I would never go to gas if I could help it - the diesel is so effortless in pulling that load even through mountains. But if you aren't pulling something heavy, the diesel probably doesn't make as much sense.

But for lighter vehicles, if the diesel option cost $1000-2000 instead of $8000, the payoff might be a lot faster.

 

[Renze]

Dodge doesn't make the Sprinter, the US ones are assembled from kits shipped from Europe by Freightliner, which is still owned by Daimler. So Dodge is probably going to stick with Daimler engines or ditch the Sprinter entirely. I would guess the latter, the exchange rate has got to be hurting them.

The wierd thing is that Daimler is pushing both Sterling (Bullet) and Freightliner (Sprinter) in the US light truck market. Seems like it would be better to stick with just one.

The Dodge or Freightliner Sprinter is a Mercedes Sprinter, which is the same as the Volkswagen LT, or as it is called since the 2006 generation, the Volkswagen Crafter. Volkswagen sells them with their legendary 2.5 TDI engines from 100 to 174 hp

I assume you guys in America only get the 318/518 versions with 3 liter V6 in it.. In Europe they start at the 309/509 CDI with only 90 hp...

The Sterling Bullet/Dodge Ram, with a 5.9 heavy duty, medium speed (3000 rpm) diesel, is a totally different vehicle than the Sprinter with a 184 hp high speed (4500 rpm) V6 Diesel which is a detuned version of the 238 hp V6 in the ML, G and E class cars.

The Bullet/Ram is a totally different vehicle than the Sprinter. Both have their own markets, the Sprinter is a bit more civilised, and the Ram is aimed more towards the heavier duty construction market.

 

[patrick_g]

I didn't know that you had to join the military to learn that you cant judge a book by its cover.

chrome wont get you home but it might get you laid.

Kick, Sorry but you got it bassackwards. What we learned in the military was (using your analogy) that folks incapable of judging a book by its contents would indeed judge it by its cover.

If the paint was clean and shiny and it was parked on a clean floor and you could cut yourself on the creases in the staff's uniforms then of course the equipment, aircraft, or whatever must be in tip top shape.

Pat