What Happened to Dodge???

[Dutch & Di]

Well, I don't think that is very nice at all.

#1 I'm not the one that keeps the thread going. There were many, many posts between what I said the other day and my previous post on January 1st. Anyone who posted in-between my posts had the right to just start a new thread and it would have gone away.

#2 And I mean absolutely no disrespect here but if you think the thread is getting old, just skip it.

#3 What you feel I should do, is just that except that I wasn't asking what what I should do.

#4 I think if enough people speak up about this issue the better chance we have of getting Dodge to listen.

I do believe that unless I am being belligerent or flaming someone, I have the same right to post as everyone else. Diana



QUOTE=Grizzly;2200054]Diana, This thread is getting old. We keep saying the same things over and over.



The way I see it is you have two choices; Go buy a Chevy or Furd with the numbers you want or get a smaller/lighter 5th wheel.



george[/QUOTE]

 

[AClayton]

Well, since Navistar aquired Workhorse and Monaco, it was a natural to try and do something with the V8 diesels... ... ... ... ..... Shame, the DTE 466 was a great engine... ... ..... been around a long time.



At low altitudes the 8. 1 gasser will run circles around the 6. 4... ... ... ... . the 8. 1 is a force to be respected.

Barry,



I agree about the 8. 1! A very good and powerful gas engine with torque numbers that compare to that of a diesel. I have tried to convince Uncle Harvey... ... . as you refer to him, about them but he won't even give me a chance:-laf! My old Winnebago had the Allison w/8. 1 combo and it truely was an amazingly powerful MH, despite being 35'long w/two slides. I could pull my CRV and cruise at about 62mph and get 8mpg going to Florida. My current Cummins pulling my large 5th wheel doing the same trip yields almost 11mpg.



I could easily outperform even the Cummins and Cat powered coaches going up hills and still be turning less than 3500rpm's. And I am aware of the weight advantage I have but, with the emissions crap going on right now, the gas coaches are getting pretty close to that of the current diesels on the market. I mean... ... with MH's of course!!



Alan

 

[RustyJC]

Unfortunately, the 8. 1 is a moot point in the RV market as they aren't building any new Workhorse chassis with the 8. 1. As of this 5 minutes, Ford owns the gasoline-powered RV chassis market.



Rusty

 

[Barry]

How sad.



At the RV auctions I attend, the WC chassis with the 8. 1 brings heads and shoulders more money than the Ford V10 chassis.



And let me say this. I drive a Cummins... ... ... . it just happens to have a Dodge wrapped around it. All of my Dodge trucks have served me well. Most of them never went back to the dealer for anything. But,in my fantasy land that I visit from time to time, I dream of finding a beautiful 550 Ford Western Hauler with a blown engine. Then drop in a Cummins bolted to an Allison. What a combination.



If Ford and Cat were to ever come to the table and not think that they are doing each other a favor, that would be a fine piece of equipment.



mi dos centavos... ... ...

 

[Grizzly]

Well, I don't think that is very nice at all.

#1 I'm not the one that keeps the thread going. There were many, many posts between what I said the other day and my previous post on January 1st. Anyone who posted in-between my posts had the right to just start a new thread and it would have gone away.

#2 And I mean absolutely no disrespect here but if you think the thread is getting old, just skip it.

#3 What you feel I should do, is just that except that I wasn't asking what what I should do.

#4 I think if enough people speak up about this issue the better chance we have of getting Dodge to listen.

I do believe that unless I am being belligerent or flaming someone, I have the same right to post as everyone else. Diana



QUOTE=Grizzly;2200054]Diana, This thread is getting old. We keep saying the same things over and over.



The way I see it is you have two choices; Go buy a Chevy or Furd with the numbers you want or get a smaller/lighter 5th wheel.



george

[/QUOTE]





Diana, I certainly didn't mean to ruffle your feathers by what I said. I was just trying to say that if Dodge won't make the truck you need, then I'd consider a GM or Ford. I personally would never buy a GM or Ford, but if they make what you need, it's maybe worth considering. The other option is to downsize the 5er.



I know, it's your call. You started this thread and I'm just adding my two cents.



george

 

[HBarlow]

Barry,

I agree about the 8. 1! A very good and powerful gas engine with torque numbers that compare to that of a diesel. I have tried to convince Uncle Harvey... ... . as you refer to him, about them but he won't even give me a chance:-laf! My old Winnebago had the Allison w/8. 1 combo and it truely was an amazingly powerful MH, despite being 35'long w/two slides. I could pull my CRV and cruise at about 62mph and get 8mpg going to Florida. My current Cummins pulling my large 5th wheel doing the same trip yields almost 11mpg.

I could easily outperform even the Cummins and Cat powered coaches going up hills and still be turning less than 3500rpm's. And I am aware of the weight advantage I have but, with the emissions crap going on right now, the gas coaches are getting pretty close to that of the current diesels on the market. I mean... ... with MH's of course!!

Alan

Here is just one of the reasons why I remain completely unimpressed with the GM 8. 1 liter gas V8:

Full Test: 2001 Chevrolet Silverado 2500 HD

You stated you could climb the hills turning less than 3500 rpms. That was probably an accurate statement but is there really a meaningful difference between climbing hills @ "under 3500 rpm" and climbing hills @ the engine's torque peak of 3200 rpm?

The 8. 1 was rated to produce 455 ft. lbs. of torque buzzing it at 3200 rpm but how much torque did it produce at 1500 rpm where a Cummins pickup engine of much smaller displacement produces 650 ft. lbs. ? Or at idle where the Cummins 6. 7 produces around 400 ft. lbs.

The power characteristics, the rpm band at which an engine produces real usable torque is what matters. When GM pays several million dollars for television and print ads that claim a V8 engine produces 455 ft. lbs. of toruqe that sounds good to the uninformed but means very little when that engine is actually attempting to pull a hill with a load behind it.

The 8. 1 was nothing more than a recycled old GM 454 ci gas V8 with a longer stroke and better heads. The GM 454 was designed and first used as a big lazy gas hog V8 in passenger cars. It was and is a lousy engine for light truck or motorhome use. The 8. 1 is only marginally better.

Neither of those engines is worth even an honorable mention in a conversation about Cummins truck engines.

 

[Barry]

Uncle Harvey,



Your data is from a test in a Chevrolet pick up. I have no experience with the 8. 1 engine in a pick up. My reference is solely in Class A motor homes.



I once bought a big motor home on a Freightliner Truck frame. It had a 325 Kitty Cat with an Allison 3060 6 speed. At the same time, I also bought a 34' class A gas on a WH chassis with the 8. 1 gasser. We left Florida headed for Texas with me in the lead. The 8. 1 could run up on me in the hills anytime he wanted... ... ... ... ... . and I had my foot in that Cat.



Is it in the same league as a Cummins or a Cat. No, of course not. But in the gas motor home realm, it is, IMHO the KING of gas motor home engines.



mi dos centavos.....

 

[RustyJC]

As far as large displacement gasoline engines go, we owned a 1996 Dodge 3500 dually with the 8. 0L (488 cu in) V-10 and 47RE with 3. 54 rear axle. This engine was rated 300 BHP @ 4000 RPM and 450 ft-lb @ 2800 RPM. Towing a 13,500 lb GVWR 5th wheel after we moved back to Texas, this truck found itself in 2nd gear @ 3500 RPM and 55 MPH up the 6% grades in the Texas Hill Country (ref. I-10 westbound going into Kerrville). After selling the 1996 and purchasing our 2002 3500 dually (Cummins HO/NV5600 rated 245 BHP @ 2700 RPM and 505 ft-lb @ 1600 RPM), we could pull the same grade in 6th gear @ 70 MPH and 2350 RPM (4. 10 rear axle) with an Edge EZ.



If you visit the RVing forums such as iRV2.com and check in the Workhorse chassis forums, you'll find that the 8. 1L GM engine isn't that different from the Dodge 8. 0L V-10. Yes, it will pull the steep grades, but it has to rev to do so. By the way, you'll also find a number of users who have recently suffered catastrophic engine failures with the 8. 1L at relatively low mileage in both the front engine and rear engine (UFO) Workhorse chassis - these failures include broken crankshafts and ventilated blocks and oil pans.



Rusty

 

[NIsaacs]

When Harvey is on vacation, TDR is boring



I used big block gassers for 20 years to haul heavy and built/re-built a dozen in that time frame. I would wear out the hood hinges, always working on them.



In 1990 I installed a new 5. 9 in my "74 Ford and have never had a head off on any of the three Cummins powered trucks I have. I would hate to ever have to go back to a gas powered tow truck.



Nick

 

[TFucili]

The 8. 1 was rated to produce 455 ft. lbs. of torque buzzing it at 3200 rpm but how much torque did it produce at 1500 rpm where a Cummins pickup engine of much smaller displacement produces 650 ft. lbs. ? Or at idle where the Cummins 6. 7 produces around 400 ft. lbs.

The power characteristics, the rpm band at which an engine produces real usable torque is what matters. When GM pays several million dollars for television and print ads that claim a V8 engine produces 455 ft. lbs. of toruqe that sounds good to the uninformed but means very little when that engine is actually attempting to pull a hill with a load behind it.

The 8. 1 was nothing more than a recycled old GM 454 ci gas V8 with a longer stroke and better heads. The GM 454 was designed and first used as a big lazy gas hog V8 in passenger cars. It was and is a lousy engine for light truck or motorhome use. The 8. 1 is only marginally better.

Neither of those engines is worth even an honorable mention in a conversation about Cummins truck engines.

Exactly! Before buying my '05 CTD I had an '04 Chevy with the 8. 1/Ally. It was a blast to drive around town, a regular hotrod. It towed my box trailer OK, but got 8 MPG doing it, and the trans would hunt and scream the motor on hard grades. It was not even in the same universe as towing with the Cummins. It ended up getting lemon-lawed due to the much hallowed Allison that they couldn't fix. Further back in time, when I was a Deere dealer, I bought an '82 Chevy with a 454 4-speed and Jerr-Dan rollback body to haul tractors. It got down the road, but I remember thinking what a gutless pig it was, after hearing all my buddies rave about big-block Chevys. I was, and continue to be, unimpressed.

 

[RustyJC]

Ref my post #68. I wasn't even considering fuel economy. Over the same route in the Texas Hill Country towing the same 5th wheel, the 1996 V-10 got 6. 5 MPG while the 2002 HO/6-speed got 11 MPG.



Rusty

 

[HBarlow]

Uncle Harvey,

Your data is from a test in a Chevrolet pick up. I have no experience with the 8. 1 engine in a pick up. My reference is solely in Class A motor homes.

I once bought a big motor home on a Freightliner Truck frame. It had a 325 Kitty Cat with an Allison 3060 6 speed. At the same time, I also bought a 34' class A gas on a WH chassis with the 8. 1 gasser. We left Florida headed for Texas with me in the lead. The 8. 1 could run up on me in the hills anytime he wanted... ... ... ... ... . and I had my foot in that Cat.

Is it in the same league as a Cummins or a Cat. No, of course not. But in the gas motor home realm, it is, IMHO the KING of gas motor home engines.

mi dos centavos.....

Barry,

Yep, those were pickup specs and the only ones I could find. I would have to assume that GM cancelled production of the 8. 1 for good reason.

I looked but could not find any engine specs for the GM 8. 1 engine in the GM motorhome chassis. If anything, the hp and torque numbers would be lower than for the pickup version in a futile attempt by GM to make that pos engine live beyond the warranty.

Motorhomes? Gas motorhomes? A comparison of gas engines in motorhomes?

You might as well be telling me about growing some sort of exotic petunias in a flower garden. I don't mean this to be impolite to you but who cares?

I have no interest whatsoever in any motorhomes and certainly not gas-powered ones. My experience with motorhomes has been extremely limited. Back in the '70s when I was single (divorced), poor as a rat, on sea duty in San Diego, and living in a travel trailer in a ghetto mobile home park in Imperial Beach I had a girlfriend, briefly, who owned and lived in a gasoline motorhome in the same ghetto. The motorhome had a very nice and comfortable bedroom. That is the only experience or interest I've ever had in motorhomes.

 

[HBarlow]

When Harvey is on vacation, TDR is boring

I used big block gassers for 20 years to haul heavy and built/re-built a dozen in that time frame. I would wear out the hood hinges, always working on them.

In 1990 I installed a new 5. 9 in my "74 Ford and have never had a head off on any of the three Cummins powered trucks I have. I would hate to ever have to go back to a gas powered tow truck.

Nick

I'm not good for much but I suppose I'm pretty good at stirring it up!

 

[NIsaacs]

Well Diana..... looks like your new truck is here, 30,000 GCW Good things happen to those who wait



Nick

 

[AClayton]

Well Harvey, I have argued with you over this and similar subjects on numerous occasions and we never seem to get anywhere. You did admit to not knowing or even caring about MH's and all I was doing was backing up 'Barrys' post with comparable facts... ... ... because I HAVE owned them. You don't like MH's and gas engines and that is fine... ... . I get it! But Barry and I are right and YOU are wrong in this case. The 8. 1 has been a proven performer in the gas MH industry... ..... read GAS! MH industry. Please understand that... ... ... . GAS MH's! The 454 does not compare to the 8. 1 and the pickup line of trucks have different rear end and overall final drive ratio than the MH's do. I used to cruise at 65mph at 2100rpm in my MH which is probably not much different than your truck towing your 5th wheel. I would get 8mpg moving the same overall weight that you do pulling your RV. I would assume you get a bit better but I bet it's not much better. Do you have better economy in the mountains? Yes sir you do! What I'm trying to get you to understand is that I'm aware of the advantages of diesels... ... . I own one! But, in the gas MH industry, the 8. 1 is a capable performer and will easily outperform the diesels. I know you say you don't care but you're like a rash on the computer screen when a poster even mentions a minute advantage or comparison to a diesel. If you didn't care you would just skip over the gas motor posts. But you can't help yourself... ... . ARGUMENTATIVE old man:-laf:-laf:-laf



Comparing old gas MH chassis technology of the 70's and 80's is like comparing diesel pickup technology of that vintage to that of today.





Alan

 

[Dutch & Di]

Well that certainly sounds very promising. Can you lead me to where you found this information? Diana

Well Diana..... looks like your new truck is here, 30,000 GCW Good things happen to those who wait



Nick

 

[seafish]

Well that certainly sounds very promising. Can you lead me to where you found this information? Diana

Well right here on TDR, of course !!



Ram announces High Output 6. 7L Cummins and class leading torque and tow ratings at Chicago Auto Show





https://www.turbodieselregister.com...-2500-3500-high-output-pickups-announced.html

 

[Dutch & Di]

See that's what happens when you click on the link in the e-mail instead of going through the home page!!!!!!!!!
I printed it out and both Dutch and I read it. A call to the local Dodge dealer immediately followed. They hadn't heard but were going to check on it and get back to us. Boy does this sound promising!
Dutch was r-e-a-l-l-y happy reading about the 410 gear!!!!!!!!!!!!
Doesn't sound like they will have one in time to "show" at MAY MADNESS but that sure would be nice wouldn't it. Diana

 

[RVTRKN]

See that's what happens when you click on the link in the e-mail instead of going through the home page!!!!!!!!!

I printed it out and both Dutch and I read it. A call to the local Dodge dealer immediately followed. They hadn't heard but were going to check on it and get back to us. Boy does this sound promising!

Dutch was r-e-a-l-l-y happy reading about the 410 gear!!!!!!!!!!!!

Doesn't sound like they will have one in time to "show" at MAY MADNESS but that sure would be nice wouldn't it. Diana

When I wanted to order my C&C in 06 for the 07 MY, I went through the same issue, at least they (Dodge reps) know it wont include the C&C. I waited for the HP increase for the 07. 5 C&C, and it turned out to only be for the regular pickup and cost me an extra 2K in price

 

[Wiredawg]

diana,



Sometimes magic happens. all someone that is some what influential to inform dodge there are a lot of Dodge Cummins customers that are multiple purchase cusotmers who whant to be impressed! I'm on my 5th Cummins Turbo Diessel Truck purchaser and many who come are also multti puchasers. We are coming too and would be happy to inform Pahrumpm Dodge we need to see the new offerings.



we can't see getting rid of our 4500, but we earned the right to see new stuff.



Wiredawg a Cummin's



Hee Hee!