Post by: jackelope on March 31, 2010, 08:51:36 PM
Post by: dewandgin on March 31, 2010, 08:55:50 PM
Post by: fishcrazy on March 31, 2010, 09:36:55 PM
Kris
Post by: whacker1 on March 31, 2010, 09:38:20 PM
Fuel mileage goes down with the addition of the DPF. I do love that technology makes these motors so much more efficient when it comes to exhaust, but i hate the fact that we are sacrificing fuel economy for emmissions. Enviro whack jobs and politicians want us to lessen our dependence on oil/fossil fuels, but in the same note they want us to cut our emissions. Can't have your cake and eat it too, well at least not with today's technology.
Post by: MuleySniper on April 01, 2010, 06:59:45 AM
MS
Post by: Rick on April 01, 2010, 08:28:33 AM
I think they have started to listen to what customers want.
IMO they're NOT listening to what customers want. I guarantee you there are more guys wishing for better fuel mileage than 400hp.
Whats more useful for 95% of the guys driving diesels? An additional 5mpg or an additional 25hp?
The diesel engines of 7-8 years ago made more than enough power for the general public.
Post by: jackelope on April 01, 2010, 08:33:14 AM
Post by: whacker1 on April 01, 2010, 08:48:52 AM
Quote
IMO they're NOT listening to what customers want. I guarantee you there are more guys wishing for better fuel mileage than 400hp.
Whats more useful for 95% of the guys driving diesels? An additional 5mpg or an additional 25hp?
The diesel engines of 7-8 years ago made more than enough power for the general public.
OK, I am going to get on my soap box for a minute. I totally agree with much of the sentiment expressed by others.
i wonder what would happen if they just let engineers design the most fuel efficient engines possible with out care for emissions?
Diesel pickups go from about 14-17 miles per gallon (depending on brand) with current emissions to 23-25 miles per gallon if you use the modern technology without the emissions requirements. I may be a little off, but my point is that there has been a dramatic swing in diesel and gas technology in the last 20 years. Here is my problem with the situation: How much in clean emissions do we have as a carbon footprint at 14 miles per gallon vs. 23 miles per gallon with less fuel consumption. My thinking here is that we are ultimatley sacrificing 40-60% on fuel efficiency to have cleaner emissions. How many more metric ton of clean emissions do you really get if you are burning 40-60% more fuel nationwide? Maybe I am way off, and technology really has reduced emissions to a point where this makes sense, but I find it hard to believe that they have cut emissions by 50% and increasing fuel consumption by 50% over the alternative. My bet is that at best we are at break even.
Same is true on some of the gas motors. Why is it that an early 1980's chevy citation can get 32 miles per gallon, but a chevy malibu or ford taurus can barely get to 32 miles per gallon almost 30 years later?
Post by: Buckmark on April 01, 2010, 08:52:34 AM
Yep the Mid Year 2010 Duramax's will have it also they are using Urea based mixing solution. Duramax's have numerous warnings but if you run it dry it will still start but you can only go 5mph. Just ordered 2 55 gal drums of it. ;)Just PEE in the exhaust fluid tank... :chuckle:
Post by: jackelope on April 01, 2010, 09:15:27 AM
I had a 1994 Chevy 6.5 liter turbo diesel 3/4 ton long bed ext cab truck with big tires on it and got 22mpg all the time and I drove it like I stole it. Granted that was a turd motor but I could drive from Bellevue to Montana on 1 tank of fuel.
Our PT Cruisers get 16mpg on the highway...talk about pissed off customers!! A little tiny 4 cylinder car that won't top 20mpg on the highway.
These trucks are also costing upwards of $50k to buy...I gotta wonder how much more $$ all the useless emissions crap adds to the price of the new trucks these days.
I am envisioning some new service drive upsell opportunities....
Diesel Exhaust Fluid service...
:chuckle:
maybe about $169.95+tax.
8)
Post by: Woodchuck on April 01, 2010, 09:20:41 AM
Post by: Curly on April 01, 2010, 09:24:08 AM
Post by: sisu on April 01, 2010, 09:24:42 AM
All the bars will have drive up service, free schooner for every 5th pee. :chuckle: :chuckle:Yep the Mid Year 2010 Duramax's will have it also they are using Urea based mixing solution. Duramax's have numerous warnings but if you run it dry it will still start but you can only go 5mph. Just ordered 2 55 gal drums of it. ;)Just PEE in the exhaust fluid tank... :chuckle:
Post by: jackelope on April 01, 2010, 09:26:26 AM
:dunno:
Post by: Sporting_Man on April 01, 2010, 09:30:58 AM
Post by: sisu on April 01, 2010, 09:32:20 AM
We need smaller diesel engines that will power smaller pickups and SUVs... Some people can get away with Ford Ranger sized pickup, with modern and potent diesel, that would yield 25 mpg, or so... 160-170 diesel horses, with tons of torque. I would be first in line for such a truck...I read some where that Europe has 50% of their auto industry in diesel.
Post by: whacker1 on April 01, 2010, 09:36:51 AM
Volkswagon TDI - Turbo diesel insjection. You can get it in the Jetta or Passat. My friend has a Jetta from about 2002, and it normally gets between 40-50 miles per gallon. They have recorded as much as 62 though on other occassions of just strate driving.
Dodge Sprinter - the mercedes long van that you see lots of carpet stores, and fedex driving around are a 5 cylinder Mercedes diesel that gets between 25-32 miles per gallon.
My understanding regarding SISU's comments is that many of the european diesels won't meet the U.S. emission standards, so they remain in Europe and asia.
Sure would be neat to have a 1/2 ton 6 cylinder diesel or a ford ranger with a small diesel. But our country will make the emissions so that the ford ranger diesel goes from 35 down to 20 miles per gallon. :bash:
Post by: bearpaw on April 01, 2010, 09:42:46 AM
Post by: jackelope on April 01, 2010, 09:58:04 AM
In 2005 and 2006 they put a 2.8 liter diesel in the Jeep Liberty which is a great little engine. The problem is they had EGR problems with them. I think it's a 7.0 hour job to replace one. Lots of problems there. Too bad because it is a neat little smokewagon.
My co-worker has a 2006 VW Jetta with a 2.0 turbo diesel that got 48mpg on a recent roadtrip to oregon. It makes 98 horsepower.
Post by: provider on April 01, 2010, 12:11:08 PM
I've had multiple issues with the particulate canister filling up and constant check engine light going on and off. Their suggestions are to drive with the exhaust brake on at all times (I do), and whenever the particulate canister fills up, to just go run it on the hwy 70mph for 45min to an hour. Well that isn't an option wehn your in 4wd and in the snow and 30 miles from the pavement. This has happened to me!
Anyway, any advice? Thanks. I heard there is a class action lawsuit I should look into.
Post by: Rick on April 01, 2010, 12:24:57 PM
Do you guys have any reccommendations on what I should do with my 2007 Dodge Ram 6.7L Cummins? This was the first year they went to that BlueTech emmission system and I've had nothing but problems with it. Dodge is unwilling to cooperate and there is no fix.
I've had multiple issues with the particulate canister filling up and constant check engine light going on and off. Their suggestions are to drive with the exhaust brake on at all times (I do), and whenever the particulate canister fills up, to just go run it on the hwy 70mph for 45min to an hour. Well that isn't an option wehn your in 4wd and in the snow and 30 miles from the pavement. This has happened to me!
Anyway, any advice? Thanks. I heard there is a class action lawsuit I should look into.
Do you tow anything with it,or is it just a daily driver?
My dad has an '07 with the 6.7 with close to 30k miles on it. He had one re-flash done at about 10k miles but other than that its been absolutely trouble free.
About 95% of the time its driven he is towing something. Its never just driven around town.
From everything I've read,the guys with the most issues with the 6.7 are the guys that don't work their truck.
My '07 with the last of the 5.9s has had more issues than his (supposedly problematic) 6.7
Post by: jackelope on April 01, 2010, 12:31:13 PM
Do you guys have any reccommendations on what I should do with my 2007 Dodge Ram 6.7L Cummins? This was the first year they went to that BlueTech emmission system and I've had nothing but problems with it. Dodge is unwilling to cooperate and there is no fix.
I've had multiple issues with the particulate canister filling up and constant check engine light going on and off. Their suggestions are to drive with the exhaust brake on at all times (I do), and whenever the particulate canister fills up, to just go run it on the hwy 70mph for 45min to an hour. Well that isn't an option wehn your in 4wd and in the snow and 30 miles from the pavement. This has happened to me!
Anyway, any advice? Thanks. I heard there is a class action lawsuit I should look into.
There's probably 5-6 different service bulletins and repairs for the problems with the 6.7's.
It no longer has anything to do with the work factor. There's DPF's getting replaced, turbo's getting replaced, software updates that change the way the regen process happens, an EGR and turbo cleaning procedure, etc. Bring me the truck and we will fix it for you. It is not uncommon for the truck to need a couple repairs depending on the nature of the problem.
I sent you a pm.
I love replacing turbo's under warranty.
Post by: jackelope on April 01, 2010, 12:45:47 PM
Post by: bearpaw on April 01, 2010, 12:53:06 PM
Post by: bearpaw on April 01, 2010, 01:01:11 PM
We tried to find another older dodge diesel about a month ago, but the resale on the older diesels is just sky high because everyone wants the older trucks rather than the new ones. :twocents:
Post by: jackelope on April 01, 2010, 01:06:05 PM
5.9L diesel, 2006 or early 2007(before they switched to the 6.7L Bluetec) megacab...
Haven't seen one with good miles in 8 months of watching.
Post by: Curly on April 01, 2010, 01:22:02 PM
Jackelope, in 1983 myself and a friend who owned a diesel VW Rabbit drove to Houston TX. If I remember correctly it cost us about $20 each to split the fuel. We were getting about 50 mpg. You would think America would have improved upon this by now. Friggin sad state of affairs.... :bash:
Sad state is right......
The friggen global warming alarmists and eco wackos are who I blame. Europe, Australia, New Zealand, etc. use a lot of diesel cars and they can't be sold in this country because of the emission standards. They are driving cars over there that get 80 mpg and have plenty of power. It pisses me off that we can't get more diesels in this country. >:(
Post by: teal101 on April 01, 2010, 03:52:41 PM
All these new "enhancements" are hurting sales of diesel rigs. I bought a 2003 ford recently, but a diesel mechanic friend told us not to buy any ford diesel newer than 2003. We figured he knew what he was talking about.
We tried to find another older dodge diesel about a month ago, but the resale on the older diesels is just sky high because everyone wants the older trucks rather than the new ones. :twocents:
My 98.5 Cummins sport quad cab shortbox with 80k miles on it cost $12000 :o
Granted it has some go mods done to it as well and looks brand new.
Post by: THINK_N_ELK on April 01, 2010, 04:47:04 PM
We need smaller diesel engines that will power smaller pickups and SUVs... Some people can get away with Ford Ranger sized pickup, with modern and potent diesel, that would yield 25 mpg, or so... 160-170 diesel horses, with tons of torque. I would be first in line for such a truck...
I agree with sporting_man. There all these small to midsized tractors out there. These things can run 6-8 hrs pulling implements at 2500-3000 rpm on 5 gallons of fuel. Put that same motor in a small truck or SUV and now you have a work horse.
What ever happened to all the diesel cars and trucks that was around in the 80's?
Post by: mkcj on April 01, 2010, 05:09:38 PM