Motor Trend puts Cummins MPG below Duramax

[robertyoke]

I think the Ford people must have been happy just getting out of a 100 mile test drive without that 6. 0 POS taking a dump on them . I wouldn't touch one of them . [/QUOTE]


that's funny:-laf

I like when you ask a ford 6. 0 owner about their truck, they say things like, best truck I 've ever had for towing. then you ask what they had before and you usually hear ... "gas motor". well no ****!

I've never heard "had a Cummins".
-robert

 

[KHorikawa]

Man you guys get some great mileage! Mixed highway/city I get 12. 5 MPG and all long haul unloaded highway, 14. 2 MPG. I also drive really light foot too! These are my best MPGs to date at 9k on the odometer. I've changed fuel filters, air filter, and use fleetguard and Delo every 3500 miles and still the same.

I've called my dealer about the reflash but they want to keep the truck overnight. Normally that would be fine but the dealer I bought my truck from is 55 miles away. I dont really trust any of the local Dodge dealers here in the city since they don't even have a Cummins on the lot.

I vowed to never buy another Ford because overnight/weeklong stays and rental cars killed me. BUT at least my Dodge runs, thats the main difference I guess.

I can't imagine how bad my towing mileage will be!

 

[Alan Reagan]

Sullivan, Here's my impression of the reflash: https://www.turbodieselregister.com/forums/showthread.php?t=120050



It was my opinion on the two 04. 5s I drove that they had a significant drone at 70 mph. Both were 4. 10 rears and it was like driving with stacks right behind the cab. I opted for the 05 because it didn't have that drone.

 

[DPelletier]

I don't know about the mileage claims, they may be valid. I hope all the trucks had the same gearing and I wonder if they would have gotten the same results with all 6 spds. I would think testing 3 manuals would be more accurate as the different autos have different # of gears, lock-up points, etc. I also think the Cummins (due to its HD nature) takes more time to break-in and mileage probably changes more than the other two from a brand new truck to fully broken in.

That having been said, I do believe that our mpg advantage has greatly diminished in the last few years; victim of increased emmissions and increased power outputs. I also think you could take 10 identical CTD's and perform that same trip and you'd see a variation of at least as much as is talked about in the article.



One thing is for sure: My buddies '05 Ford is WAY, WAY, WAY louder than my Dodge and it sounds like a tin can full of ball bearings at idle. With both our trucks idleing beside each other, you can't even hear mine! The tester musta been smoking crack.



Dave

 

[Vaughn MacKenzie]

I don't get where MT thinks the PSD is quieter. Have you listened to a Ford, lately?



I'm with Ischultz . . . I cancelled by sub to MT in 1989, haven't paid a cent for an issue since then.



Vaughn

 

[rbattelle]

I just started a subscription to MT because I've never had one before. I've tried the others (C&D, R&T) and wanted to give MT a try. So far I actually like them... they don't seem to pull any punches when they think something is a junker.



I don't like shooting down articles just because they don't say what I'd like them to say, but something's fishy with that MT article. They say about the Ford 6. 0:



"This is a contemporary powerplant, including a variable nozzle turbocharger (akin to the Duramax's), high-pressure common-rail injection (containing pressures up to 26,000 psi!), pilot injection (an early dollop of injection spray quiets the signature diesel rattle), and exhaust-gas recirculation to reduce NOx emissions. "



Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the 6. 0 uses the HEUI system, similar to that used on the 7. 3. And I agree with others that pilot injection does not exist on the 6. 0.



They mention, in regard to the Ford:

"... remarkably stoppable, aided by the boat trailer's independent brakes. "



Did the GM and Dodge not have trailer brakes?



The Ford posts better acceleration values than the GM and the Dodge, which is interesting. Given it's inferior torque I suspect this has more to do with transmission than anything else.



The Dodge was the cheapest of the group, but that didn't seem to be considered. Looking over the hard data, the Dodge should have beaten the GM and come in 2nd at the very least based on its numbers. The only thing the GM beat the Dodge in was the fuel economy numbers. So what gave the GM an edge?



-Ryan

 

[DPelletier]

You're right Ryan,

No common rail, just the old HEUI crap (I hate that system with a passion) and I know several people with 6. 0 PSD's who've had a reflash and lost thier pilot injection.

Like you say, the Ford has the same HP (at a higher RPM) and less torque, so without a gearing advantage or perhaps something to do with the automatic, it can't accelerate better. If they really want to compare motors, it needs to be done with 3 trucks as closely optioned as possible, the same gears, and all 6 speeds.



Dave

 

[NMansfield]

I'm suprised the durasmash ran that long without injector failures :-laf ... must of had a deaf ear to the ford I've had my 04. 5 idling beside an 04 ford trying to talk to the guy 3 feet away, I couldn't hear a thing he said till he shut that noisy thing off. I agree with JDerbedrossian... who's payin the bills?? NOT DODGE!!

 

[DPKetchum]

Lots of complaints on the Ford sites about the TIN CAN rattle on the 05s. Its the turbo from what I read. Sometime about the vanes. I bet it sounds great being the turbo is right up high in the middle of the dash.

 

[jsimpson]

Ok, I don't know quite what to think. My 04. 5 with 4. 10's is maybe getting 16 mpg at 70. I kind of expected this. I would expect the trucks with 3. 73's to get 18 maybe 19 mpg. However after riding in a 05 Duramax all weekend I can say I saw it get 19. 5 MPG and it does seem quieter and rides a heck of a lot smoother than my 2500 even though the chev was a 3500 SRW. None the less as my wife said, "I like our truck mutch better, especially the interior" and keep in mind she was a Chevy fan and was pushing me very hard to go with the Chevy. I don't regret buying the big Dodge one bit and I don't need a magazine to tell me what a good truck is.

My brother's 01 D-max is considerably noisier and slower than my Dodge. His 2500 rides a lot rougher than my 3500. His mileage is the same as mine. I do like his seats better. Hus D-max has gotten progressively noisier with age. It has 35,000 milwa. Mine has 25,000.

 

[NickSullivan]

Enough BS

My brother's 01 D-max is considerably noisier and slower than my Dodge. His 2500 rides a lot rougher than my 3500. His mileage is the same as mine. I do like his seats better. Hus D-max has gotten progressively noisier with age. It has 35,000 milwa. Mine has 25,000.

Don't know what to tell you. The ride was remarkably smoother than my 3/4 Ton even though the Chevy was a 1 Ton. If your telling me you don't beleave me go drive an 05 for yourself and be honest with yourself.



I love the fact that I drive a real truck with a solid front axle and am not afraid to use it. If I owned a truck with IFS I would not be able to use it the same way I use my Dodge and expect it to last as long without serious repairs and muliple alignments.

 

[Edgemann55]

Been talk that the drone sound could be coming from the hydro formed chassis on the 3rd gen trucks. Sound resonates thru it.

 

[Camp]

I love the fact that I drive a real truck with a solid front axle and am not afraid to use it. If I owned a truck with IFS I would not be able to use it the same way I use my Dodge and expect it to last as long without serious repairs and muliple alignments.

It's just too bad Dodge gave us a ball joint front end instead of kingpins. These ball joints aren't lasting all that long and they aren't cheap or easy to repair

 

[DPKetchum]

I bet there will be a recall on ball joints on 2500/3500. The drone and hydro formed frames has been discussed a WHILE back. So has the cab to frame mounts being to hard.

 

[red-rider]

I have a question for you guys.



Now my buddy has a 2500 Heavy Duty Duramax it has an 8 cyclinder and its a 6. 6 liter, how do you really compare the two trucks if ours are striaight 6 with 5. 9 liter? How can a 6. 6 liter save more fuel then a 5. 9 liter? Also we have a 34 gallon fuel tank and the chevy has a 28 besides filling up more at the gas station then we do.



I drove his truck and it rides the same as my dodge 2500, the only thing I noticed inside is that his actually looks like a work truck inside, where mine looks like a combination of work and sports, ya know.



Just curious.

 

[BHolm]

I have owned two D-max trucks, and '01 and an '03, both 2500HDs. I currently have three third gen CTDs, all 3500s, one dually. There is no doubt that the GM trucks have a softer ride. Problem is, I found it to be too soft for any type of serious hauling. Adding Bilstien shocks helps control the ride a ton because the stock GM shocks are way too soft. Still the GM trucks ride better, or softer anyway. I prefer the firmer ride of the Dodge and much prefer the solid front axle design.



As for milage, I compared them side by side on several 1200 mile trips between MN and CO. This included more flatland than I care to recall and pretty much all of the major mtn climbs in CO. My '03 QC short box 3500 auto 3. 73 vs the Chevy same gears auto trans. The Cummins easily knocked down a trip average of 16. 7 and the D-max 14. 3. The new 600 in my '05 might be closer to the D-max but with substantially more power than the LB7 D-max. I much prefer the low revving nature of the Cummins. The Allison transmission sends the tach spinning way to often where the 48re keeps it locked into OD.



As to how can a 6. 6L V8 use less fuel than a 6 cyl 5. 9L, easy, inject less fuel. The more fuel you dump into a diesel the more power(and heat and smoke) it makes.

 

[jnelson]

I have about as much faith in Motor Trend as I do in John Kerry.



My last trip to KY i averaged 18. 9 mpg. That was hand calculated. Aslo with the Edge on the highest setting.



. 02