Dodge 1500 Diesel

[Lance B. Johnson]

I believe18 wheelers use this setup. Seems to work well for over the road truckers.....

So it depends on how well its built. I know that I have replaced enough bushings in cars to know they do go bad. I will never have to replace one on the rear end of my Titan. Never.

Lets just say that when I hit the gas while towing my boat I like to know that the rear axle isnt going anywhere.

Edited September 25, 2013 by Ruffdog

[Bozboat]

Depends on what you are towing and how often. Many 1/2 ton's are rated to tow over 11,000 pounds now. Boats are easy tows, and the trailers have brakes. You want to tow your 8500 pound boat a few times a year on a road trip, 1/2 ton can easily do the job and you get the ride quality and improved mileage for commuting. You want to tow a 10,000lb fith wheel across the country, then yes, 1/2 ton is a bad choice.

Yes, I am aware that my EB has the 11K tow capacity. I have towed things behind trucks ranging from hay carts, to three axle fifth wheel campers. I have owned and abused a variety of 1/2 gas and 3/4 diesel trucks. Sure you can move your camper or boat with the lawn tractor or fork lift, buy I stand by my opinion, that towing anything over 8500 pounds is, for me, pushing 3/4 territory.

[jk13]

So it depends on how well its built. I know that I have replaced enough bushings in cars to know they do go bad. I will never have to replace one on the rear end of my Titan. Never.

Um...the leaf spring eye bushings on my 96 Tahoe are in desperate need of replacing. They do go bad too.

I have no problem with using coils in the back. Most mid and full size SUVs have used them for quite a while now. And frankly I'd rather replace a control arm bushing than a leaf spring bushing any day.

[gwoods]

http://m.motortrend.com/roadtests/trucks/1309_2014_ram_1500_ecodiesel_first_drive/

Ram estimating 27mpg. So if it's 25 on highway(not towing) that beats ecoboost by 5mpg? If so the diesel will pay itself off pretty quick. Seems to me like the Ford ecoboost is more than $2800 option, but not certain. I don't see any 1/2 ton truck beating that kind of mileage.

At most i tow my boat 6-8 times a season. The non towing around town mileage is what kills me.

[wakesetter8796]

I think ecoboost is a $750 option over the 5.0 or at least it was when it was released. I would take the diesel over the ecoboost any day.

[nyryan2001]

And I was joking about the Fiat lawmower engine.... just would to have like to have seen 300hp/500ftlbtq ish.

[Tims]

The article says 20.1 in mountainous driving. IT also says "After completing our tow testing, we were even more pleased to see the fuel economy – 13.3 mpg. And that was on some of the most arduous terrain over which you can tow boat."

Is it really unfair to suggest it would get 15 not going over 8% grades as the article also says? I'm pretty confident the 25 mpg figure I referenced was from a ram release posted on the crew a while back when it was posted the GCherokee would get 30. Either way, as to pricing, I bought a laramie 4x4 loaded to the gills (I mean the gills, nitrousbird would even agree) for 38 and change. Ford with ecoboost and optioned the same (platinum) couldn't come close to that....not close...Way more than 3k difference allowing a "free" upgrade to the diesel compared to the ford.

I'll be around long to enough to collect on a wager that a 5.0 diesel titan will not get 19 mpg being tested in the mountains you're darn right! PErhaps you're forgetting all the other fuel saving tech in the dodge that we have no indication will be present on the nissan. In normal mixed driving I bet the dodge gets 22, NOT lollygagging around at 60 (who drives 60 anyway?). No way that 5.0 will get 21. If so, I'll eat crow of your choice.

cheers

I bought a 2013 F150 FX4 with every option available including the 6.2 V8 ($2K premium over the eco) for $43. It stickered for $54. The Dodge I priced was $42. We can go round and round all day on price I guess. Probably depends on timing and incentives at the time. But I will conceed to you on price and say the 2 trucks cost the same OTD. The big issue you have not addressed is the fuel cost. The mileage difference is not going to make up for .60 cents per gallon!!!! Assuming the Dodge does get 21 average, the eco at 18 average still has a lower overall fuel cost. Then add in maintenance and Urea cost. If I am not going to see a difference in my pocket book, then at least give me some kind of performance advantage!!!!! And right now, the Eco will competely out perform the Dodge. So what is the advantage of the Dodge??

[Tims]

You want to see an HD engine delivering HD economy in a half ton truck. I don't. We differ. We're adults, we're allowed to do that. I do, however, have an interest in world class economy in a half ton truck, you don't, we differ, no biggie.

Apparently every person who drives a diesel truck NOW. That's a pretty obvious answer don't you think?

Nope, the people who buy diesel trucks now pay the premium for fuel and maintenance to have 800 pound feet of torque. If the HD trucks offered gas engines with more power and the same torque with overall less/same fuel cost, they would buy them over the diesels if they were logical.

Edited September 25, 2013 by Tims

[Tims]

And I was joking about the Fiat lawmower engine.... just would to have like to have seen 300hp/500ftlbtq ish.

You are not the only one totally dissapointed in the Dodge offering. I am really excited about the new Titan, espicallly that it will bring jobs back to the Cummins plant. I know some engineering folks at over there and they are all really pumped about this new engine.

http://cumminsengines.com/the-new-cummins-50l-v8-turbo-diesel-brings

[FastFreddy]

And I was joking about the Fiat lawmower engine.... just would to have like to have seen 300hp/500ftlbtq ish.

My 2005 Dodge 1 ton had 325hp and ~600ftlbs of torque. It also weighted close to 9000lbs with the lift/tires, extra fuel and tools. I tihnk the 1/2 ton diesel is properly sized for it's weight and towing capacity.

Don't get me wrong more is better, I run a Smarty programmer and I dyno close to 450hp and 850ft-lbs of torque.

[85 Barefoot]

I bought a 2013 F150 FX4 with every option available including the 6.2 V8 ($2K premium over the eco) for $43. It stickered for $54. The Dodge I priced was $42. We can go round and round all day on price I guess. Probably depends on timing and incentives at the time. But I will conceed to you on price and say the 2 trucks cost the same OTD. The big issue you have not addressed is the fuel cost. The mileage difference is not going to make up for .60 cents per gallon!!!! Assuming the Dodge does get 21 average, the eco at 18 average still has a lower overall fuel cost. Then add in maintenance and Urea cost. If I am not going to see a difference in my pocket book, then at least give me some kind of performance advantage!!!!! And right now, the Eco will competely out perform the Dodge. So what is the advantage of the Dodge??

See above... 27 highway on the ram...I don't agree with your math. Assuming 21 and 18 (again, I personally know no one who gets 18 out of their EB) but either way, that's a 16% difference in mileage. In my area, gas is $3.50 and diesel is under 4. That's a 12% difference. It's close at that, and given you're doing better than most (all) at 18, and teh ram rated for 27 highway, I think the justification CAN be there fore some people. Again, this is all an exercise in preference. Now, contrast that with a 5.0 diesel likely getting 19-20 (ate VERY best), I totally agree with you, which is why, in my OPINION, the 3.0 makes far more sense in this application than a 5.0.

Isn't DEF like $2.50 a gallon? Longevity of a diesel is not a performance advantage?

Edited September 25, 2013 by 85 Barefoot

[jetskipro550]

Work must be real slow today...

Edited September 25, 2013 by jetskipro550

[Tims]

I guess we will just have to wait and see what the "real world" mileage numbers end up being with the Dodge. With my driving habits and the fuel difference (see gulf cost fuel cost. http://www.eia.gov/petroleum/gasdiesel/) here in TN, the Ram will have no payback next to an eco and will for sure not perform as well. (Way less power and 2000lb less towing capacity) By the way, you can get a F150 xl with an Ecoboost for around $26K (See ford web page) vs.a base Ram diesel for $30K.

Longevity is no longer an advantage for a diesel. Talk to your local diesel mechanic about modern emission diesels. Have to clean/replace DPF filter at 120,000 miles for ($2000.00), Heat from DPF cycles reduces turbo life, EGR systems clog intake systems, fuel contamination destroys HPFP systems, expensive filters and oil.

I will say it again. If you are going to pay the premium for a diesel, at least it should out perform the gassers.

Edited September 25, 2013 by Tims

[Tims]

Work must be real slow today...

Yup, ISO audit going on today......

[85 Barefoot]

See above... 27 highway on the ram...I don't agree with your math. Assuming 21 and 18 (again, I personally know no one who gets 18 out of their EB) but either way, that's a 16% difference in mileage. In my area, gas is $3.50 and diesel is under 4. That's a 12% difference. It's close at that, and given you're doing better than most (all) at 18, and teh ram rated for 27 highway, I think the justification CAN be there fore some people. Again, this is all an exercise in preference. Now, contrast that with a 5.0 diesel likely getting 19-20 (ate VERY best), I totally agree with you, which is why, in my OPINION, the 3.0 makes far more sense in this application than a 5.0.

Isn't DEF like $2.50 a gallon? Longevity of a diesel is not a performance advantage?

Longevity of a diesel?? Have you forgotton about the DPF filters that need to be changed/cleaned at 100,000 miles? (That's like a $2000.00 service.) How about HPFP problems caused by water in the fuel. ($8K to fix) How about heat damage to turbo caused by DPF cleaning cycles. Talk to the diesel mechanics about modern diesel longevity. I am sorry to say, it's no longer a performance advantage. It's really cool going into limp mode when you run out of DPF or your fluid heater fails and it 0 degrees outside. (Ask me how I know.)

Since we can't agree on regional fuel prices or mileage, let's try something else. You can get an eco boost in a XL equipped F150 for around $26K. (Priced off of Ford web page) The Dodge diesel starts at $30k. If we use EPA ratings (Not official on Dodge but lets say it gets 23 average which I dont believe will happen) and use current US national fuel prices. (http://www.eia.gov/petroleum/gasdiesel/) I come up with the following cost of ownership.

Diesel Ram Base Price $30,180 Eco Boost F150 XL Base Price $26,460 Miles Driven Per year 15000 Miles driven Per Year 15000 EPA Mileage (Average) 23 EPA Mileage 17 Annual Gallons used 652.17391 Annual Gallons used 882.35294 Fuel Price (National average) 3.949 Fuel Price (National Average) 3.495 Annual Fuel Cost $2,575.43 Annual Fuel Cost $3,083.82 Total cost to own (Year One) $32,755.43 Total cost to own (Year One) $29,543.82 Total 5 Year Cost $43,057.15 Total 5 Year Cost $41,875.82

Eco has same close to same tq curve, same total torque, and well over 100hp, making for a much better driving experience. So again, where is the value?? At least with the 5.0 diesel, you will get better performance.

So you want to use "real world" MPGs in our friendly wager and then at the same time use MSRP as part of a cost analysis for which makes more financial sense? I cannot engage in that as we both know those numbers are arbitrary and vary wildly. btw Dodge estimates 20/27 mpg.

As to the DPFs, while that may be a $2,000 part at a dealer on a 6.7 cummins, this won't be near that price and of course other options exist, you know that Tim. As to what mechanics wouls say, why is this being grouped with hd diesels? You think diesel mechanics in Europe or here on VWs agree with your diesel gripes? That HD diesels that are used to their max see expensive repairs is hardly a surprise. That has nothing to do with an economy diesel offering. That's analogous to telling people beware of the expense of an HD diesel because semis are expensive to repair. It's devoid of relevance to the discussion.

I really don't see how you cna say a "much better driving experience" when you have yet to even drive one. You haven't driven it with the new air suspension, haven't tried towing, haven't seen the new interior, etc. I don't romp on my truck from every stop light (which will be the only thing it clearly gives up to the EB), I do enjoy the ride of my truck better than the F-150s I drove, and yes, this is all an opinion. I clearly don't see why this is an open and shut comparison to the EB. I chose the hemi over the EB. Why? My Borla sounds nice. Is that a rational decision? No. Are there plenty of people out there who swear by diesel and will give this truck a crack, yep.

Edited September 25, 2013 by 85 Barefoot

[CumminsBu]

I agree with 85, don't buy a diesel power truck or car because I don't want a longer line at my green hose pump.

[Tims]

So you want to use "real world" MPGs in our friendly wager and then at the same time use MSRP as part of a cost analysis for which makes more financial sense? I cannot engage in that as we both know those numbers are arbitrary and vary wildly. btw Dodge estimates 20/27 mpg.

As to the DPFs, while that may be a $2,000 part at a dealer on a 6.7 cummins, this won't be near that price and of course other options exist, you know that Tim. As to what mechanics wouls say, why is this being grouped with hd diesels? You think diesel mechanics in Europe or here on VWs agree with your diesel gripes? That HD diesels that are used to their max see expensive repairs is hardly a surprise. That has nothing to do with an economy diesel offering. That's analogous to telling people beware of the expense of an HD diesel because semis are expensive to repair. It's devoid of relevance to the discussion.

I really don't see how you cna say a "much better driving experience" when you have yet to even drive one. You haven't driven it with the new air suspension, haven't tried towing, haven't seen the new interior, etc. I don't romp on my truck from every stop light (which will be the only thing it clearly gives up to the EB), I do enjoy the ride of my truck better than the F-150s I drove, and yes, this is all an opinion. I clearly don't see why this is an open and shut comparison to the EB. I chose the hemi over the EB. Why? My Borla sounds nice. Is that a rational decision? No. Are there plenty of people out there who swear by diesel and will give this truck a crack, yep.

We can use any criteria you want when we compare the 5.0 Cummins to the Fiat.

I was simply trying to explain that mileage gain will be offset by initial purchase price and fuel cost delta. The diesel option will be a premium.

Let me be clear. I LOVE diesel engines, but I am under no illusion that the option is going to save me any money. It is a lux item and the real benefit it stump pulling torque. If I can buy a gas engine that does the same thing for same/less money well.......it's not an open shut comparison, just don't understand the value.

DPF cost based off of my 3.0 TDI VW. Owners manual stated that it would be possible to clean DPF but may require replacement at 120,000 miles. Talk to the mechanic that worked on my VW about modern diesel longevity. They have the same potential issues that the HD ones do. I think I can speak to the potential performance of the Ram as it has almost identical engine specs to the VW diesel that I owned, except that the Ram will weigh more and most likely get lower fuel economy. I did drive the Ram with air suspension. Nice truck, but not with 240hp. (My opinion)

BTW, they need to get rid of that goat.

[85 Barefoot]

We can use any criteria you want when we compare the 5.0 Cummins to the Fiat.

I was simply trying to explain that mileage gain will be offset by initial purchase price and fuel cost delta. The diesel option will be a premium.

Let me be clear. I LOVE diesel engines, but I am under no illusion that the option is going to save me any money. It is a lux item and the real benefit it stump pulling torque. If I can buy a gas engine that does the same thing for same/less money well.......it's not an open shut comparison, just don't understand the value.

DPF cost based off of my 3.0 TDI VW. Owners manual stated that it would be possible to clean DPF but may require replacement at 120,000 miles. Talk to the mechanic that worked on my VW about modern diesel longevity. They have the same potential issues that the HD ones do. I think I can speak to the potential performance of the Ram as it has almost identical engine specs to the VW diesel that I owned, except that the Ram will weigh more and most likely get lower fuel economy. I did drive the Ram with air suspension. Nice truck, but not with 240hp. (My opinion)

BTW, they need to get rid of that goat.

That analysis has been obvious to every person who has ever bought a car with an engine option. The distinction is that you're seeing outstanding mileage for an EB, you're underestimating the mileage the 3.0 will "supposedly" get, as well as pitting the diesel option exclusively with the EB and state quite conclusively that the numbers don't add up. For many reasons, that's not always going to be the exclusive comparison for people interested in the truck. Of course, the most blatant flaw in your analysis was the residual value, as it if it was amortized correctly, the difference is even less using the Ford-slanted numbers anyway, if not in the dodge's favor.

As to the opinion of mechanics, I never said there is not "POTENTIAL" for problems, you lambasted me for FORGETTING about maintenance. I do strongly disgaree with your statement that "longevity is no longer an advantage for a diesel". Of course its an advantage. Does longevity balance the added expense?...it all DEPENDS.

[Tims]

That analysis has been obvious to every person who has ever bought a car with an engine option. The distinction is that you're seeing outstanding mileage for an EB, you're underestimating the mileage the 3.0 will "supposedly" get, as well as pitting the diesel option exclusively with the EB and state quite conclusively that the numbers don't add up. For many reasons, that's not always going to be the exclusive comparison for people interested in the truck. Of course, the most blatant flaw in your analysis was the residual value, as it if it was amortized correctly, the difference is even less using the Ford-slanted numbers anyway, if not in the dodge's favor.

As to the opinion of mechanics, I never said there is not "POTENTIAL" for problems, you lambasted me for FORGETTING about maintenance. I do strongly disgaree with your statement that "longevity is no longer an advantage for a diesel". Of course its an advantage. Does longevity balance the added expense?...it all DEPENDS.

I base my argument off of actual mileage from eco that I have driven and a 3.0 TDI that I owned for a year. You do understand what I mean by "average mileage" right? I think 23 combined city/hwy is pretty fair. You don't, I get it, but we will have to wait and see. What diesel have you owned in the last 2 years to offer your actual experience?

Longevity, like I said, talk to the mechanics. From a dollar standpoint, it's not an advantage anymore.

Funny thing, as much as we disagree, we both have basically the same trucks. (Except mine is faster than yours)

Edited September 26, 2013 by Tims

[Lance B. Johnson]

I still can't believe people argue this. You don't buy a diesel or a hybrid to save money.

[85 Barefoot]

I still can't believe people argue this. You don't buy a diesel or a hybrid to save money.

Certainly not all, but many do. The Ram is a perfect example. It will easily save money over the HEMI. What Tim did not address, and often gets left out of the analysis, is the residual value difference of diesel v gas, especially in trucks.

[Lance B. Johnson]

Certainly not all, but many do. The Ram is a perfect example. It will easily save money over the HEMI. What Tim did not address, and often gets left out of the analysis, is the residual value difference of diesel v gas, especially in trucks.

Upfront costs cancel residual value. Fuel prices trump savings with fuel economy. Maintenance costs can't be argued any more. The overall complexity of the diesel equals and in many cases exceeds that of the gasoline engine these days and maintenance costs have increased right a long with it. It won't save money on the hemi. I have done the math as well.

Edit: Now if the government would lift some of the fuel and emission regulation on the diesel then you might have an argument here.

Edited September 26, 2013 by Ruffdog

[Tims]

Watch the residual values of these new diesels as they age and people get a taste of working on these engines out of warranty and paying .40 to .60 cents per gallon more. It's already starting to happen in the fleets as many companies are going back to gas engines.

[85 Barefoot]

Upfront costs cancel residual value. Fuel prices trump savings with fuel economy. Maintenance costs can't be argued any more. The overall complexity of the diesel equals and in many cases exceeds that of the gasoline engine these days and maintenance costs have increased right a long with it. It won't save money on the hemi. I have done the math as well.

Edit: Now if the government would lift some of the fuel and emission regulation on the diesel then you might have an argument here.

Check your math then. Hemi get 14/20...diesel will get 20/27

Let's assume 16 and 23, fair? Assuming 15,000 miles a year thats 937 gallons on the hemi, 652 on the diesel. Assuming $3.50 and 4.00, that's $3,279.50 on the hemi annual fuel expense and $2,608 on the diesel. That's more than $600/year savings. It's a $3,000 upgrade at RETAIL. That's pays for itself in less than five years even DISREGARDING residual value. As to maintenance, don't forget that the HEMI requires 30k mi spark plug changes (2 plugs per cylinder) which is more than $400 at my dealer. So, by 100,000 miles your up to $1,200 in SPARK PLUGS. The DEF is cheap, DPF lifespan is at that this time unknown, so concluding that maintenance is more expensive on the diesel is at best, premature.

[85 Barefoot]

Watch the residual values of these new diesels as they age and people get a taste of working on these engines out of warranty and paying .40 to .60 cents per gallon more. It's already starting to happen in the fleets as many companies are going back to gas engines.

I guess the rest of the world who pays significantly more for gas and diesel are just idiots then that their diesels are ticking time bombs with an expensive, cost-prohibitive repair coming at any moment and explain that they're better off running petrol in their Peugeots.

Edited September 26, 2013 by 85 Barefoot