Gas powered trucks

[MA2LA]

I know I'm on the wrong site for that topic but i figure if i can get an honest answer it would be here. I'm still looking at new work trucks and my boss cant seem to stomach the price difference between gas a diesel. I've been looking at the ford 6. 2l v8 in either a 250 or 350. they are rated to tow 12. 5k witch is at the higher end of what i plan on towing. i will be towing about 30% of the time with a combination of trailers including a 28ft l 8ft tall v nose trailer. I know my trusty 06 5. 9 has no problems but i cant help but wonder how the gas 6. 2 would do. it has pretty much better numbers across the board than my old 7. 4 chevy ever did and comparing it to the 5. 9 td i had in my 99 dodge it dosent seem that far behind but how hard will it have to realy work to do the job where our oil burners seem to just keep going down the road like nothing is even there. I realy am beating my head against the wall trying to find the right truck with in the limits i've been given. but when i price it out it seems the doge is about 10k over a similar ford with a gas v8. . that pays for alot of fuel.

 

[AH64ID]

Its more than just fuel (which will be a huge difference). Its the rate of acceleration and the rpms required to make the power. The 6. 2 Ford makes 385 hp, which is actually more than the 6. 7, so if you put them both at the rated rpm the Ford will have more tq to the ground, but do you really want to go everywhere at 5500 rpms? Gas engines take rpms to make power, so its noisy, and burn a lot of fuel, and it really slow on getting the load moving, but once its there you'll hold if you can handle running 60 in 2nd.

My brother went from a stock 93 Cummins to a 06 Hemi, which has 115% more hp and 94% of the tq than his stock Cummins. . and HATES it when towing anything. The Hemi has treated him well, but awaits the day he gets a diesel again. . Mileage, power, comfort when towing, etc. .

Durability and maintenance are another factor, but honestly I have no clue what it takes to maintain the 6. 2 Ford when its worked.

 

[WILLD420]

For light towing, say under 6K lbs, I don't think it's worth it to have a diesel, especially if you aren't going to keep it past 200K miles.

One thing to keep in mind is that it's not your truck, your boss has to make that decision.

If I had to pick a truck for a bunch of hired hands to drive it would probably be the gas rig. It might cost more in fuel and not last as long, but it won't have the power to kill itself or break things as easily. I find it hard enough to keep Diesel rigs running and in one piece when you know what you are doing. When you take a work truck that might have 3 or 4 different people driving it, many who won't care if they break it, then it's a no brainer for the gas engine.

Todays gas engines aren't your old ones of the 90's. They have a lot higher power ratings, they use less fuel and they typically run for 100K miles before they need anything other than a tune-up. I cannot say the same for the new diesels. The big 3 just haven't seemed to figure out how to make them meet emissions standards and not have some issue somewhere. Whether it's turbo's coking up, head gaskets popping, DPF's plugging up or some other crappy issue, I don't think I would touch one with a ten foot pole if I didn't have someone I could trust 100% behind the wheel.

 

[Bill Stockard]

My brother, who has been a die hard Ford buyer, is sick of his '08 Ford F250 with a 6. 4L diesel. Since he drives short distances and drives slowly around the farm, it is in constant regeneration. The fuel mileage is awful! He uses the truck on the farm and doesn't tow except to haul cattle to the sale barn or the vet in a medium size gooseneck cattle trailer no more than about a dozen times a year and for less than 30-40 miles round trip. The Ford truck is driven slowly around the pastures in 4-wheel drive and gets stuck easily because of the heavy diesel engine on the front axle. He is seriously considering taking his big loss and trading for a '11 Dodge 2500 with a 5. 7 Hemi. He doesn't want to be a "tester" for Ford's new gasoline engines... he's had enough! For his type of use, he doesn't need a diesel.



Bill

 

[AClayton]

I have to agree! Gas trucks in today's society do have their benefits when compared to the fuel-thirsty new diesels. I still need a diesel because I tow a large RV but my 5k utility trailer could be easily pulled with a Hemi. The mileage wouldn't be the same as my 01' Cummins but I bet it would be really close to the 6. 7l Cummins... ... ... again, that is towing a smaller trailer. I am very much aware a Hemi CAN tow my 5th wheel but the power disadvantage will be painfully obvious whenever I finally crest a steep mountain pass.



Alan

 

[jelag]

I've got a Jeep with the Hemi... towed a small 3K lb trailer to AZ and back... I didn't buy the jeep for fuel economy, but doesn't do too bad as a nice car... . easy to get into... but towing that trailer the mileage was down to 10-11 mpg, for that I could have taken the truck and gotten 15..... and maybe should have...

I've always kept my stuff a long time... . trucks at least 400K miles and some closer to 500k..... When I ran the business we always had 3 or 4 trucks around and I would buy a new one every year...

Over the long haul, a good diesel is worth its weight in gold... but I'd consider a gas engine in a truck as my life style changes... we're still going to full time RV with this truck and expect to put another 200K miles on it for sure... . maybe more...

 

[WILLD420]

These are the things I'm talking about.

Unfortunately, the newer diesels are not really optimal for the small time user. For a farm truck, I think they are going to lose the market share due specifically to the smog/regeneration issue.

MPG when towing is going to be horrible with any gas engine compared to the diesels of yesteryear. 10-11 is pretty normal for any Hemi. They just don't have the low end torque needed. We've hauled a little with a Hemi and it did just fine, as long as you were turning 4500 rpm. We would get passed by V10 Dodges and Fords all the time and they got the same or better mpg than we were getting. Granted, they didn't have the same nice exhaust tone, but they got the job done better for towing.

The manufacturers are all stuck on stupid when it comes to this new "Horsepower" race. I can build any size engine to make 350HP using the right parts, but that doesn't mean it will tow for diddly.

As an example. Back before you could get all these fancy diesels, we used to tow with 70's and 80's Fords and Chevy's. Most had 350's or 351's in them. They would tow all day long at 2000-2500 rpm and have their best economy of 9-11 mpg. They would tow a little slower than the new Hemi's but we still got the job done at basically the same mpg. Then came the fuel injected big blocks, they would get 9-10 mpg towing the same loads, but not slow down as much on the hills. Speed limits were still 55 back then, so the high speeds you see today weren't playing in the equation.

Then the horsepower wars started and the makers started putting in engines that had a few more ft/lbs of torque, and a lot more hp, but the power curves were all above 3500 rpm. Yes, they were faster and more efficient when empty, but they kept the tall gearing 3. 55's which meant if you wanted to use that power curve, you were breaking the speed limit in 2nd gear and getting worse mpg while you were at it.

We all went back to the 80's and 90's trucks, threw away the crappy things the factory's did, like the Dodge TBI fuel injection and got our mpg and towing ability back. Of course, we were poor, we lived where smog wasn't an issue and we had to do with what we could afford.

I guess my point is that technology isn't always better. Quite often, the opposite when it comes to engine management, until they figure things out.

 

[HBarlow]

These are the things I'm talking about.

Unfortunately, the newer diesels are not really optimal for the small time user. For a farm truck, I think they are going to lose the market share due specifically to the smog/regeneration issue.

MPG when towing is going to be horrible with any gas engine compared to the diesels of yesteryear. 10-11 is pretty normal for any Hemi. They just don't have the low end torque needed. We've hauled a little with a Hemi and it did just fine, as long as you were turning 4500 rpm. We would get passed by V10 Dodges and Fords all the time and they got the same or better mpg than we were getting. Granted, they didn't have the same nice exhaust tone, but they got the job done better for towing.

The manufacturers are all stuck on stupid when it comes to this new "Horsepower" race. I can build any size engine to make 350HP using the right parts, but that doesn't mean it will tow for diddly.

As an example. Back before you could get all these fancy diesels, we used to tow with 70's and 80's Fords and Chevy's. Most had 350's or 351's in them. They would tow all day long at 2000-2500 rpm and have their best economy of 9-11 mpg. They would tow a little slower than the new Hemi's but we still got the job done at basically the same mpg. Then came the fuel injected big blocks, they would get 9-10 mpg towing the same loads, but not slow down as much on the hills. Speed limits were still 55 back then, so the high speeds you see today weren't playing in the equation.

Then the horsepower wars started and the makers started putting in engines that had a few more ft/lbs of torque, and a lot more hp, but the power curves were all above 3500 rpm. Yes, they were faster and more efficient when empty, but they kept the tall gearing 3. 55's which meant if you wanted to use that power curve, you were breaking the speed limit in 2nd gear and getting worse mpg while you were at it.

We all went back to the 80's and 90's trucks, threw away the crappy things the factory's did, like the Dodge TBI fuel injection and got our mpg and towing ability back. Of course, we were poor, we lived where smog wasn't an issue and we had to do with what we could afford.

I guess my point is that technology isn't always better. Quite often, the opposite when it comes to engine management, until they figure things out.

WILLD420,

Your's is a thoughtful and accurate post that I agree with but I don't see any way to avoid the bad technology forced by government bureaucrats.

I purchased my truck to pull heavy trailers like my own large fifth wheel travel trailer. A gas engine would not be acceptable for me with this load.

I hate the government imposed emissions crap as much as anyone, perhaps more, but I don't see any way out of the mess the blow-dried empty suits have created.

And, in truth, part of the newer technology is great. It would be hard to go back to the earlier Gen II or Gen III trucks after owning my '08. Perhaps it would be even harder for those who are now enjoying all the comforts of a new '10 or '11.

The gasoline vs. diesel decision is a bit more complicated than just fuel economy though. Longevity, durability, and resale value can be calculated with hard numbers. Comfort and satisfaction is more subjective and harder to quantitate but still a factor.

I don't want a gas engine truck, even if it can be proven cheaper to own and operate.

 

[WILLD420]

WILLD420,



Your's is a thoughtful and accurate post that I agree with but I don't see any way to avoid the bad technology forced by government bureaucrats.



I purchased my truck to pull heavy trailers like my own large fifth wheel travel trailer. A gas engine would not be acceptable for me with this load.



I hate the government imposed emissions crap as much as anyone, perhaps more, but I don't see any way out of the mess the blow-dried empty suits have created.



And, in truth, part of the newer technology is great. It would be hard to go back to the earlier Gen II or Gen III trucks after owning my '08. Perhaps it would be even harder for those who are now enjoying all the comforts of a new '10 or '11.



The gasoline vs. diesel decision is a bit more complicated than just fuel economy though. Longevity, durability, and resale value can be calculated with hard numbers. Comfort and satisfaction is more subjective and harder to quantitate but still a factor.



I don't want a gas engine truck, even if it can be proven cheaper to own and operate.

I understand perfectly. Part of my problem in life is letting go of the past and accepting the payments that come with moving into the future. I'm sure that in a couple years things will be much better than they are today. Technology reinvents itself every 6 months or so, with that, I'm sure many of the issues we face with the 2008-2010 trucks will be solved.



I can see your side perfectly well, just as long as we remember that for every use, there is a tool that will get the job done, and there is a tool that is right for the job.



I sure hope he figures out something from all my ramblings after I hijacked his post. .

 

[MA2LA]

just for the heck of it I called the ford dealer to ask if we could set up a demonstration to see if the 6. 2 towed worth a darn. . guess what they said no. . i told him that ratings arent all they are cracked up to be. . my 99 cummins was only rated at 10k i think but it would do it all day and night into a head wind and never complain. . he responded that the 6. 2 woud do it but that it would be working hard to get 11 to 12 k down the road and would eat gas(i knew this already but having them be honest is new to me) i just need to figure out how to just get my boss to spend the money and be done with it.

 

[HBarlow]

It sounds like you boss has his heels dug in on this issue. Perhaps your approach is wrong. Agree with your boss and let him buy a pos small gas engine. You and all of us know you'll work it to death.

When the truck is junk in two or three years, or worse, suffers mechanical failures early, maybe your boss will see the advantage of a diesel.

 

[WILLD420]

Is there a specific reason you didn't look at the Chevy 6. 0?

For reference, we have a 2500 4x4 longbed 4door at work with the 6. 0. It gets about 13 empty at 65 mph. Towing a 20ft snowmobile type enclosed V-nose trailer, it gets 9 or 10 mpg at 65-70. It's got plenty of power with the 6 speed auto trans, does everything a truck needs to do and was a LOT cheaper than a Duramax.

I'd go with a 6. 0 chevy that has years of track record before I'd touch a first year model Ford.

 

[TMutziger]

Has anyone else checked out the ford website and viewed the durability testing videos on the new ecoboost engine for the F150? If there is any truth to them, it looks like one heck of a gas engine. 365 hp and 420 tq out of a 3. 5L and 20+ mpg. Still wouldn't give up my diesel for one though.

 

[jgillott]

Has anyone else checked out the ford website and viewed the durability testing videos on the new ecoboost engine for the F150? If there is any truth to them, it looks like one heck of a gas engine. 365 hp and 420 tq out of a 3. 5L and 20+ mpg. Still wouldn't give up my diesel for one though.

I watched the videos on ford.com the other day. Keeping in mind all the typical marketing department hype, if there is even some truth to all of that, then there is reason to be excited about the future of gasoline engine technology. Of course, I wouldn't want to touch one of those until they spend a few years in real world use. Remember how much the 6. 0L was hyped when it was introduced. :-laf



On a side note, I always keep a gas powered truck around for work, the short trips that I don't want to start the diesels for, winter snow, general beating around use, etc. Our current one is a 2010 Ram 1500 Crew. Before that was an '05 Silverado. Good vehicles for what they are. I would just never ask them to do what we do with our diesels.

 

[WestTN]

The Cummins does provide excellent fuel mileagee, as well excellent power, but also great lonjevityThis is an almost impossible combination to beat.



Mine now has 158,300+ miles and still has less than $500 in repaires.



Andf it is still running the first set of repacement tires!

 

[MRFost]

Nobody seems to have mentioned transmissions -- the diesel transmission will hold up better than that behind the gasser. The gasser will be *constantly* shifting with any heavy load. Good luck with a gasser pulling any significant load 30% of the time. Hey -- when the gasser fails in two years, the Boss will give you free rein to purchase something appropriate next time!

 

[Powder Extreme]

The 6. 2L in my Yukon Denali pulls my 14' dump trailer at about 8k just fine. It will handle a 6% grade with no problem, but of course the motor is spinning 4000+ when climbing. But, just because a gas engine is spinning faster doesn't mean it's hurting it.

Loaded it will get 10-11mpg (which isn't that much different than a new diesel) Empty it will get 20-21mpg which is better than a new diesel.

Economy wise, my Yukon is quite a bit better than my diesels, since it doesn't sound like you're towing that often or that heavy, a 6. 2L GM gasser probably isn't that bad of a choice. If you were towing more weight, more often, I'd say a diesel is the only way to go. Naturally a diesel will last longer overall, but I run my Yukon's to 95 - 100k before selling them and have never had a problem.

 

[AClayton]

PE,



So far I have agreed with a lot of what you have posted on the gas vs. diesel ownership. But you are really stretching it by stating your 6. 2 get's that kinda mileage pulling that kinda weight through mountain grades. There is no way that gas engine is capable of that. I had a perfectly tuned 4. 8l Chevy before I bought my 01' Dodge and the best it ever did was 9mpg towing my 5k lb trailer. That was hand calculated and the only time the dash mpg gauge read relatively accurate was when driving unloaded. I realize the 6. 2 is much more advanced but that figure just doesn't sound right. I would suspect that would be hard to achieve even towing on level roads.



The fuel economy and/or emissions is the only reason I don't go out and purchase a new truck. I love the new Dodge and test drove one and even test drove the new 2011 Duramax. I liked the Dodge interior and price better but the Duramax was quieter inside. The Duramax also had more 'nanny's' preventing the use of all that power at low speeds. I know they have it based on a camping friend who pulls a 5th wheel the same size as mine. His 2011 is able to keep up with me on the grades and that is rare for ANY truck other than a Dodge. Even the modded 6. 0 PS do not have the torque to do that job. I have no friends that own a hopped-up earlier Duramax so I cannot comment... ..... other than what I've read. That the Duramax matches a lot of the towing prowess that our Cummins' achieve.



Alan

 

[Powder Extreme]

PE,



So far I have agreed with a lot of what you have posted on the gas vs. diesel ownership. But you are really stretching it by stating your 6. 2 get's that kinda mileage pulling that kinda weight through mountain grades. There is no way that gas engine is capable of that. I had a perfectly tuned 4. 8l Chevy before I bought my 01' Dodge and the best it ever did was 9mpg towing my 5k lb trailer. That was hand calculated and the only time the dash mpg gauge read relatively accurate was when driving unloaded. I realize the 6. 2 is much more advanced but that figure just doesn't sound right. I would suspect that would be hard to achieve even towing on level roads.

Alan

No, you're absolutely right, I guess I should have been more specific. Towing over the hill that I mentioned the average is closer to 7mpg. On a long relatively flat tow, overall the mileage is 10-11. No doubt the hills kill the gas engine much worse than the diesel.



On a different note, running over that same hill everyday (38 miles from home to work 95% highway) the average sits at pretty much a solid 17mpg day in and day out. Cruise set at 75mph. If I take it on long trips the mileage jumps up into the 20mpg area.

 

[MA2LA]

I have started to look at the chevy 6. 0 after reading a recent test by a recent mag. the 6. 0 out towed the ford 6. 2 and it is a proven motor. But i think I may have made so real progress on the diesl front and if a dealer had a quad cab 3500 srw 2wd with power options in stock local I'd have the keys tomarrow.