Need a little help please. Trade my 04.5 for an '08?

[SStrano]

I know this is the 6. 7 section, and I know that everyone loves the 5. 9. I've seen the reports of terrible mileage on the new engine, but also recall seeing the same with the 600's when they came out too. I had none of those issues with mine.



What it boils down to is: I don't want a diesel hog. I have a 600 w a NV5600 w/3. 73's now (Quad, SB, 4WD). I love the engine, the transmission has been a pain in my *** since day 1, and never shifted well at all, plus the headlights and seats annoy me. Those are all I hate about my current truck.



I'm considering the "same" truck, Quad, SB, 4WD, but obviously a 6. 7, and with the auto instead. I can't see how a truck that turns a full 500 less revs can get such horrible mileage. It can't be displacement alone, Duramax's get good mileage @ 6. 6 liters. I am concerned about this mileage thing, but know from experience you tend to hear more complaints than anything since folks often like to complain.



Is there anyone out there that has changed from 600 (or "610") stick and 3. 73's to a 6. 7 auto w/3. 73's? Can you compare and contrast the mileage for me? I only know one person that has gone from a 600 to a 6. 7. He's ****** about his mileage... but he also went from a SB 2500 G56/3. 73 to a DRW 3500, long bed G56 w/4. 10's. When the "old" truck was new he got around 14 and that got up to about 19 with time. This one is getting 12. 5 so far... I'd assume (and maybe I shouldn't) that some improvement would come with time since his other truck got a lot better. I would also expect some drop in mileage with more weight and deeper gearing. Am I complete out to lunch here?



Looking for some real-world help on this if possible. Thank everyone (if anyone answers) in advance for any help. I'm just really torn... hard to pass up a lower payment for a new truck with more features (interior).

 

[catoiler]

I'll tell you what you can drive mine for the next month and you can be the judge! that will change your mind about the whinners! I would say more are ashamed to admit they get poor milage then the ones that are complaning and telling the truth. keep your truck and wait till they work the problems out then think about it. I wished I had kept my 05 insted of this gas hog!

 

[DSTEPHENSON]

I have an '08 with 2600 miles and sofar no problems at all. It doesn't get the mileage my '03 got but this new one has more power, exhaust brake and the 68rfe works great. I pull a 34'10" 5er and it and got 10. 2 MPG from Dallas, Tx to San Benito, Tx. Talked to a guy with an '08 Chevy and he was getting 11 MPG pulling the same size 5er I pull. Another person here in the RV Park said he had talked to a person with an '08 Ford and he said he was getting HALF the mileage his old truck got. Didn't say what the old truck was. I am 70 years old and I feel like a kid driving this '08. Handles like a big car and rides great.

 

[RGrizzle]

i did trade from an 04. 5 with the 600 in it . although mine was a 2500 sb auto . i traded for a 3500 mega dually 6 speed manual . i really wasn't in the market to trade but they gave me one more heck of a deal . i am getting about the same fuel mileage on the 6. 7 as i was on the 5. 9 (a litte over 18 mpg empty on the road and around 14. 5 in town ) . i like the manual better than i did the auto and the exhaust brake is out of this world for towing .

 

[rmz450]

I've never had an 600 or 610. My last Cummins was an 02 5spd. My first three tanks have averaged 11. 5, all city driving with lots of idling to warm up(-15f the last couple mornings). I would have averaged around 14 with the 02 under the same conditions. I a hoping that after a few thousand miles it will be close to the 02, 14-15 empty and 10-11 towing but with 100 or so extra HP.

 

[RVTRKN]

I've never had an 600 or 610. My last Cummins was an 02 5spd. My first three tanks have averaged 11. 5, all city driving with lots of idling to warm up(-15f the last couple mornings). I would have averaged around 14 with the 02 under the same conditions. I a hoping that after a few thousand miles it will be close to the 02, 14-15 empty and 10-11 towing but with 100 or so extra HP.

You need to have your tech activate your High Idle function to help in warm up, I had it done as soon as I found out about it, and love it for warming up my truck. The only problem I have is, it rarely gets below freezing here in So. Cal. :-laf

 

[SStrano]

I guess this is where things are confusing for me. I recall some horror stories very similar to these with the 600's. I, nor any of the 3 friend who subsequently bought them because mine was so good had those issues.



I know there are "bad eggs". I'm just trying to get a sense of how common, horrible 6. 7 mileage is, and get a read on driving styles by asking to compare to a 600. So far I've gotten two answers form folks that have had both. And they couldn't be more different.



I guess it'll come down to the deal I can get. If I can get out for a cheaper payment than I have now I'll probably do it (and I think I can given incentives and equity I have built in my current truck), and hope that I don't want to kill myself down the road.



I can't image how knocking the revs about 20% couldn't help a lot even with regen and all. That's a lot of RPM which has to just use less fuel--I'm sure less than the DPF and all that burns.



I'd love more opinions if anyone has one.

 

[jtwcummins]

I have only 4k miles on mine and I love it. replaced a 97 CTD 2500 with an 08 and don't have any regrets. I just completed a 1500 mile trip from Minden, NV to San Jose and LA. Hand calc 17. 9 MPG, overhead was closer to 20, and haven't had any problems. Took del on a Sunday and had a call from dealer about a reflash, got it done. The following Sat got a recall notice and took it in and got it done, no problems.



My big concern is fuel quality. I don't know how the stations went from LSD to ULSD. I only get fuel at stations that move lots of diesel and are labeled ULSD. In Calif the label isn't required because only the ULSD is sold. From what the tech said at the dealer, Carson Dodge, it doesn't take much of the improper fuel to plug up the emissions stuff, so I am careful.



My 97 was bombed and had a DTT auto and Kore Chase installed. The new truck rides better and is very quiet, almost an oxi-moron for a diesel, and the trans is awesome. Shifts are firm and since 5th and 6th are OD I am turning about 1700 RPM at 70 compared to 2300 in the 97, had 4. 10s.

Noticed on the trip I wasn't as tired as when we made the run in the 97. Attribute to good steering, quiet and nice seats. The exhaust brake and tow/haul work very well together.



I have 2 issues. I don't like The BFG tires. All I ran on 97 were Bridgestone REVO A/Ts and they are lots better than the stock BFGs. Also, the overhead gets to much glare and can't be be read in the daytime.

 

[RVTRKN]

I guess this is where things are confusing for me. I recall some horror stories very similar to these with the 600's. I, nor any of the 3 friend who subsequently bought them because mine was so good had those issues.



I know there are "bad eggs". I'm just trying to get a sense of how common, horrible 6. 7 mileage is, and get a read on driving styles by asking to compare to a 600. So far I've gotten two answers form folks that have had both. And they couldn't be more different.



I guess it'll come down to the deal I can get. If I can get out for a cheaper payment than I have now I'll probably do it (and I think I can given incentives and equity I have built in my current truck), and hope that I don't want to kill myself down the road.



I can't image how knocking the revs about 20% couldn't help a lot even with regen and all. That's a lot of RPM which has to just use less fuel--I'm sure less than the DPF and all that burns.



I'd love more opinions if anyone has one.

If you look at "Road trip with pics as promissed" in the C&C forum you will get a good look at my mileage for the complete trip, four thousand miles total (I removed the pics, sorry). It did not get as good of MPG as my 04. 5 2500 CTD when new but the diesel formula has changed since then and the new emissions now with the new 6. 7. but it is getting better now. I have not regretted buying mine so far, and I am very happy with it.

 

[JCleary]

I'll tell you, I wish I got the '08 with a 6. 7. I would much rather have the extra hp and awesome trans as opposed to the stripper truck I got with the 5. 9. I thought about going nuts with my '07 (reason for buying the last 5. 9 auto on the lot), but I think I'll just leave it close to stock. My 5. 9 gets 14. 1 hand-calc over 8400 miles of records since new. That's off 2-3 mpg from my '03 with 35" tires.



I wish I had the 6. 7, cause that's the mileage they get (for the most part).

 

[catoiler]

How about this, the guys with c&c's don't give your opinions as we know they are better on milage than the pick ups. I am starting to belive that if the overhead reads high on a test drive it may just get good milage and the same goes for low milage. mine on the 12 mile test drive never went above 12. 3

 

[GButia]

I have had 4 5. 9 third gen cummins. I just recently picked up an 08 6. 7 with auto. Traded an 07 5. 9. Reason for doing so was the deal that I got I just couldn't pass up. On the test drive I was completely impressed with power and features in stock form. A couple of my other ctd's were bombed to the 500hp mark so I do have some concept of what a 5. 9 can be turned into. The 6. 7 stock by no means has the slap you back in your seat power of a 500 hp 5. 9 but its no slouch. Stock for stock a 5. 9 48re doesn't hold a candle to a 6. 7 68rfe. The converter on the 6. 7 feels much tighter and the gearing is much better.

Fuel mileage... . my 6. 7 is getting 15. 5 mixed driving with about 800 miles on the clock. My previous 5. 9's did very similar when new. My 05 auto 5. 9 struggled to get 16. 5 highway even with 50,000 miles on the odo. The other three, 2 manuals and 1 auto all with 3. 73's got about 15 in town and 18 on the highway.

Its too early to tell where this 6. 7 will fall into but in my eyes it is acceptable. In the end I expect to fall in line with the 05 with the 4. 10's .

Drive one, see what you think. Mileage in the end will probably be a little less than the tried and true 5. 9 but thats what tighter emmisions will do. It will be interesting to see where ford and chevy land mpg wise after they become 2010 compliant, the dodges already are. In my opinion the 6. 7s will be hitting stride when the dmaxs and strokes basically start all over again in 2010. Only time will tell. Good luck with what ever you decide, I don't think there is really a wrong answer.

 

[Ace476]

I have a 08 6. 7 68rfe loaded with 3500 miles. Empty- 15. 5MPG, towing 14. 5K 5th wheel 9 to 10MPG. But, I love the way it handles the 5er!!!

 

[catoiler]

No compairson between the two! The 6. 7,6spd auto and exhaust brake are great!! The only thing that sucks is the fuel milage.

 

[WMoroni]

I have both, 07 5. 9 auto and 07 6. 7 auto. Both 2500, 4x4 3. 73 gears. The 5. 9 is a QC the 6. 7 is a Mega. The 5. 9 has a smarty set on level 3 and 35" inch tires. The 6. 7 is bone stock. Even with the smarty the 5. 9 is not as snappy as the 6. 7, tire size of course is a factor. I'm scared to turn up the smarty any more because my transmission is stock.

All that said, I'm getting the same fuel mileage out of both trucks. About 11 towing 10K, 14. 5 around the house and 17-18 on a road trip. All that hand calculated. The overhead lies in my 6. 7.



So basically I've got 2 trucks that do the exact same thing but I had to spend $1600 on the 5. 9 to get it there and need to spend some more on the transmission. If I were doing it again I'd have two truck with the 6. 7

 

[GButia]

I have both, 07 5. 9 auto and 07 6. 7 auto. Both 2500, 4x4 3. 73 gears. The 5. 9 is a QC the 6. 7 is a Mega. The 5. 9 has a smarty set on level 3 and 35" inch tires. The 6. 7 is bone stock. Even with the smarty the 5. 9 is not as snappy as the 6. 7, tire size of course is a factor. I'm scared to turn up the smarty any more because my transmission is stock.

All that said, I'm getting the same fuel mileage out of both trucks. About 11 towing 10K, 14. 5 around the house and 17-18 on a road trip. All that hand calculated. The overhead lies in my 6. 7.



So basically I've got 2 trucks that do the exact same thing but I had to spend $1600 on the 5. 9 to get it there and need to spend some more on the transmission. If I were doing it again I'd have two truck with the 6. 7

There is a guy over on another forum who had an 05 and an 07. 5 same exact configuration expect for the engines. The 6. 7 (bone stock) ran exactly the same time as the 5. 9 did with a straight exhaust, intake and edge ez set at max. Your not dreaming about the 6. 7 being pretty quick bone stock.

 

[SStrano]

I have had 4 5. 9 third gen cummins. I just recently picked up an 08 6. 7 with auto. Traded an 07 5. 9.



Fuel mileage... . my 6. 7 is getting 15. 5 mixed driving with about 800 miles on the clock. My previous 5. 9's did very similar when new. My 05 auto 5. 9 struggled to get 16. 5 highway even with 50,000 miles on the odo. The other three, 2 manuals and 1 auto all with 3. 73's got about 15 in town and 18 on the highway.

Its too early to tell where this 6. 7 will fall into but in my eyes it is acceptable. In the end I expect to fall in line with the 05 with the 4. 10's .

Drive one, see what you think. Mileage in the end will probably be a little less than the tried and true 5. 9 but thats what tighter emmisions will do. Good luck with what ever you decide, I don't think there is really a wrong answer.

I appreciate your response, and it's a encouraging, as have a few others. I'm just reading and reading of problem after problem with dead trucks and it's got me nervous, as well as the mileage. I asked about starting a poll (don't know how exactly to do that) regarding mileage. But a few of these answers make me feel a bit better.



I have driven the truck I'm after, and was super impressed with all the things mentioned by others. It's so much quieter than mine, and I love the auto, both gearing and the way it shifts, and the top gear revs (coming from an NV5600 truck, mine is so bad that I wish I had a gotten an auto in my current truck). I drove a G56 but prefer the auto. I have gathered from many days of reading the overheads are as far off on these as on the 5. 9's. The truck I drove showed right around 15 mpg for what I'd say is a mixed test drive (about 12 miles, some hwy, some small town putting... but it was a test drive, I flogged it a big too). Truck had 11 miles on it when I started.



I travel a lot, and I two my autocross car all over. I don't pull anything huge to often. Mostly about 7000 pounds, but prefer a real truck to do it.

 

[PaulBarker]

keep the 04. 5

 

[SStrano]

I have only 4k miles on mine and I love it. replaced a 97 CTD 2500 with an 08 and don't have any regrets. I just completed a 1500 mile trip from Minden, NV to San Jose and LA. Hand calc 17. 9 MPG, overhead was closer to 20, and haven't had any problems. Took del on a Sunday and had a call from dealer about a reflash, got it done. The following Sat got a recall notice and took it in and got it done, no problems.

A great data point. I've never been out there, but I seem to recall that the trip you took wasn't flat! I get around 19 in my 600, I could live with 17+, I guess. 15 empty wouldn't make me happy, my 6. 0 Chevy w/4. 10's got that.



It seems that most problems are with 07, early 07. 5's. Of course there are more of them than '08's, but it seems possible they are getting the "issues" straightened out? Thoughts?