Best year for CTD

[6naline01]

I realize this is subjective but what does our very knowledgable membership think was the best year, 1st gen, 2nd gen, 3rd gen, etc for bombability,reliability and performance in our trucks. I am looking for a 2nd truck to tinker and play with. I have a 01 but it has taken some time and money to get it where it is today. 6naline01 ... ... Mike Oo.

 

[RRees]

Well since I have an 06 CTD. I would vote for 06. However, I have limited knowledge about the CTD. This is my first diesel (on 3rd month of ownership). Hindsight is 20/20, should have went diesel sooner. Or more precisely, should have went Cummins sooner. There is a difference.

 

[Joe G.]

It appears that the '97 or early '98 12 valve engines are the best. As far as the rest of the truck is concerned the 3rd gen seems to be the best.

 

[dclassens]

Just my . 02, but 2002 had it all for me, and here's why:

No cat

Disc brakes

Anti locks

HO engine

24 valve

NV5600

2nd gen body style (personal opinion)



I know other trucks have this stuff, but I like this year because it is a blend of the 97 with some perks of the 3rd gen, sorta

 

[CHolman]

Just my . 02, but 2002 had it all for me, and here's why:

No cat

Disc brakes

Anti locks

HO engine

24 valve

NV5600

2nd gen body style (personal opinion)



I know other trucks have this stuff, but I like this year because it is a blend of the 97 with some perks of the 3rd gen, sorta

My 04 has no CAT

Has anti lock disk brakes

305 HO

NV5600

"4 door"

Can download massive amounts of power quick. All you need is a pusher pump, good clutch, Turbo, TST, SMARTY and MP8 you have yourself a 500 HP truck.

 

[Joe G.]

You might want to read this which was posted to another forum by a very knowlegable person:









The dealer representative was absolutely correct with respect to the common rail Cummins engines made starting with the 03 model year.



The issue is not the engine, but the fuel system, and even more pointedly - the fuel we have available.



Here is a ditty I posted for a technical discussion regarding relief valve failures on another forum, and it may help you judge the facts:



I have been following your post on trying to sort out a solution to the self-destruction of the Bosch CP3 relief valve, and thought I would send along this reference from Hartridge on the common rail Bosch systems. Page 21 (if you page the same as I do) provides a reasonably accurate depiction of the pressure levels at set rpm's of the CP3 pump. Testing is never done over 1,200 bar, because of excessive cavitation and erosion of the CP3 pistons, but the Cummins uses a total relief setting of 1,585. 85839 bar or 22,994. 824 on the CP3 pump. http://www.hartridge.com/hl021OM-EN.pdf



I also have included MAN's marine application abstract: http://www.fsb.hr/sorta2004/abstract/t7-3-man.pdf It also contains very useful data that can be extrapolated to what you are trying to achieve.



The reasons the OEM valve fails in the Dodge application is multiple. 1) The CP3 is designed to never be turned at greater than 2,000 rpm, however its maximum life is achieved at a much lower rpm of 1,200 - which translates to 2,400 engine rpm. As with all things diesel, the life performance mean time to failure is calculated at 80% engine load and speed, and that is significantly fewer rpm's than the Dodge drivers that lean on their throttles achieve. 2) For whatever reason, and I believe it is economics, Bosch does not use a real pressure accumulator, but relies on the rail and the individual injectors' pre-chamber to serve that function. As a result, and this is something with which you are very familiar in your valve experience and hydraulic system experience, the harmonics of multiple pressure releases on a undampened pressure manifold will cause the relief valve to develop a secondary vibration harmonic and set there and pop open and closed thousands of times as it attempts to stabilize the maximum rail pressure. 3) Filthy fuel. North America has the dirtiest diesel of the world. The stuff I buy in Chile is many times cleaner and filtered at 7 microns at the refinery, and has a much higher lubricity factor because it still contains sulfur which cushions the seat in the valve and the seats in the injectors. European standards for diesel are much cleaner than we have in North America at 8 micron purity, and nearly all the diesel over there is true biodiesel with high density polymers created by the type of pressure and temperature refining they use, instead of our quick and dirty alcohol separation method to clean our bio-diesel. 4) A number of folks still insist on installing pulse and width modification fueling boxes on the third generation Cummins, and that is a complete kiss of death to this design. Those modifications will give temporary power gains, but because they are being developed essentially by hackers they do not address the full range of harmonic balance and vibration (feedback) characteristics of the total fuel system, and end up either raising the bar pressure on the rail or by create spikes from pressure waves chasing each other and manifesting themselves into huge temporary pressure waves of up to 1,900 bar and greater.



As a side, I have found that really nothing will solve the dilemma of premature Bosch common rail failures outside of changing the power profile (camshaft) to bring maximum torque back down to usable rpms comparable with the old 12 valve Cummins; by lowering the fuel systems governor cut point to keep the engine rpms below 3,100; and by installing a 10 micron pre-filter and a 5 micron primary fuel filter.



The camshaft and torque curve modification raises major emission problems for the Cummins, but will make the system last comparable to what the guys with the VP44's could expect if they kept their fuel clean and available to the system.

 

[fkovalski]

Just my . 02, but 2002 had it all for me, and here's why:

No cat

Disc brakes

Anti locks

HO engine

24 valve

NV5600

2nd gen body style (personal opinion)

... .

I would say the 2001. 5 over the 2002... . for all the reasons listed above, but the '01 allowed for the front axle disconnect making for 2WD low range. Kinda' wish I never got rid of mine.









.

 

[Jong]

After reading that post by Joe G. , I'm glad I've got a 2001. 5 Quad Cab. I have had zero problems with my vp44 so far (knock on wood) and my first modification was a FASS fuel system, as soon as I bought the truck. Love the looks of the second gen Sports, especially in black or red (gotta love Dodge signature colors!!!) with the adjustability of the electronic Cummins. Only things I wish for are a transmission and rear axle built to really handle the power this thing is capable of from the factory. The OEM equipment is barely adequate with increased power levels. I'd still like to find a nice '97 regular cab with a 215hp p7100 pump... building that one would be fun

 

[GIT-R-DONE]

I would vote for a first gen truck. For some reason, I keep going back to them. Reliability and built, IMO, better than any of the others. Larger clutch and brakes. Bad thing about them is the ride, as they are rough. But they sure pull good.



2nd Gens are ok, if you stay with the 12 valves. My 02 had VP troubles and was a dog until I put a box on it.



Any of the newer ones, I cant comment on, as I havent had one, probably wont for many years to come.

 

[SHobbs]

Guess I got lucky with mine. I have 182,000 on the ticker 60k of that on B100 with the original VP44, and the 2nd L. P. Have read about other 2nd gens being problematic but, so far so good. What about a 12V in a 3rd gen, lol. The 3rd gens look good but, not to my wallet plus I don't really want all the extra crud on the motor. You see all the extra electronics these days and you will know why those with 1st gens like the 12v motor's.

 

[DWeiler]

After reading that post by Joe G. , I'm glad I've got a 2001. 5 Quad Cab. I have had zero problems with my vp44 so far (knock on wood) and my first modification was a FASS fuel system, as soon as I bought the truck. Love the looks of the second gen Sports, especially in black or red (gotta love Dodge signature colors!!!) with the adjustability of the electronic Cummins. Only things I wish for are a transmission and rear axle built to really handle the power this thing is capable of from the factory. The OEM equipment is barely adequate with increased power levels. I'd still like to find a nice '97 regular cab with a 215hp p7100 pump... building that one would be fun

Have one in Intense Blue,not really any problems yet(18000miles to date),but i did have a axle seal start to leak after 10000 miles,dealer would not cover because they said the Mag-Hytec caused it---had it replaced elsewhere. Mechanic said they did not press it in all the way at the factory,thats about it. I like the 3rd genners(brolaw has one--03 dually)but not the price.

 

[cyborg]

Just my . 02, but 2002 had it all for me, and here's why:

No cat

Disc brakes

Anti locks

HO engine

24 valve

NV5600

2nd gen body style (personal opinion)



I know other trucks have this stuff, but I like this year because it is a blend of the 97 with some perks of the 3rd gen, sorta

Hidden rear doors style (Don't like or need crew cabs)

No front axle disconnect: Seen them fail on other brands, heard of them failing on ours.

Rear discs

Real oil pressure gauge

Box frame

VP-44 (only kidding)

Dash layout

Wheels (yes, I like the way the stock wheels look)

DANA AXLES!!!!!

 

[KCJackson]

My 05 is the better truck, my 96 was the better engine (albeit underpowered in comparison).

 

[Dieselram]

98 12valve, with the 4500 enough said

 

[Grizzly]

My vote goes to the 04 and 05. True Quad Cab, best in power, best in looks, best pay load for my slide in camper.

 

[mhenon]

Joe G, that's a great post. I've always suspected the Cummins engine (all years) was not meant to be revved past 2500 rpm. If you look at any other application; marine, bus, RV, firetruck, whatever. . max rpm is around 2500rpm.

As to the best year Cummins engine that one's easy... 2002. . hands down. Unfortunately, it was the worst year for the Bosch VP44.

Mike

 

[Joe G.]

The on going saga of the VP 44 fuel system is why I chose the '97 - '98 engine. The '02 block is better, but it's really hard to beat a P7100 fuel system for reliablilty and long life. Piers has an '02 with a 12 valve head and a p7100 pump in his old Ford. Maybe he knows something.

 

[BILLVO]

If I could find another besides my 02 it would be a 98 12 valve that is the first year of the quad cab and still a 12 valve until a mid year switch to 24v.

 

[wlowe]

The '98 12 valve is considered a rarity because only a limited amount were produced due to the introduction of the 24 valve that year. The '01 is also a semi-rarity because it is the only year with both a rear disc brake Dana and front axle disconnect. The downside is availability of parts since the rear disc Dana was only used for two years. My vote is for the '01.

 

[mhenon]

i wasn't being completely serious saying the '02 was the best engine ever. . but it has few problems outside of the weak injector pump. The VP issue just happens to be "HUGE" and overshadows anything good about the 2nd gen engine.

I made up my mind this year to keep my '02 and not trade it. With a completely re-worked fuel system, tank to VP, I'm hoping (fingers crossed, knock on wood, salt over the shoulder) the VP44 will last for a reasonable length of time... like 150K or so. If that's the case I don't foresee any other engine related problems and will have the million mile truck I wanted.

Mike