Diesel Trucks

Help Support CattleToday:

Crowderfarms":2mb0kbzx said:
buckaroo_bif":2mb0kbzx said:
I've driven a Ford V 10. Nice truck, just be sure you have your kidney belt strapped on unless you are on a darn good road!

bif
Is the engine too light, compared to a diesel?Causes a rough ride?

You are right about that!!
 
buckaroo_bif":1y0np0fg said:
I've driven a Ford V 10. Nice truck, just be sure you have your kidney belt strapped on unless you are on a darn good road!

bif

Not knocking your truck but I don't understand the arguement on diesel being 5 grand more. Last gasoline lasted 200,000 miles diesel is still going at 400,000 plus thats a savings of 25 grand in my book.
 
Caustic Burno":1qp132p7 said:
buckaroo_bif":1qp132p7 said:
I've driven a Ford V 10. Nice truck, just be sure you have your kidney belt strapped on unless you are on a darn good road!

bif

Not knocking your truck but I don't understand the arguement on diesel being 5 grand more. Last gasoline lasted 200,000 miles diesel is still going at 400,000 plus thats a savings of 25 grand in my book.

I don't own a V 10 neighbors got one and I have driven it.
I drive an old 95 model F-350 with a 7.3.
Good ol truck but it'll make you wanna get out of it asap after driving our okie roads a few hours!

bif
 
You have to be a little careful on the BTU arguement, as the EPA appears to be trying its steady best to kill diesel fuel economy and/or diesels all together. In order to meet particulate emissions standards, diesels are being forced to inject their fuel later in the injection cycle, at an inefficient point.

I'll use the 05 Cummins as an example as its the simplest system: As the piston reaches TDC (top dead centre), a small shot of fuel is injected to being the combustion process, as the piston reaches TDC, the full shot is injected and injection continues as the piston starts moving down. This is an example of retarded timing. Then, a "clean up" shot of fuel is injected, well past TDC, to finish burning any hard to burn contaminates. About 60% of your fuel is being injected _after_ TDC, which is inefficient, and we lose the enhance BTUs of the diesel.

Now, you advance the timing, even 20 degrees, suddenly we get a 4 mpg boost in economy (empty), another 40 HP or so, but the tree huggers don't love you no more :(

Since 1988, I've owned a new diesel or gas engine pickup truck every year (except 03/04 when I kept my truck for 2 years). On the diesel front, HP/torque has been going up, while economy is dropping. On the Cummins front, the best year for economy was 1998, with most 98s getting an _easy_ 22mpg, when even close to properly tuned and I let many out of the shop getting 24 mpg when perfectly tuned. With the introduction of the new common rail systems on the Cummins, economy went downhill, first in 03 with the 2 shot system, and then further downhill in 04.5 with the 3 shot system. Now empty cruising, a well tuned truck will often only see 18 mpg. However, with the addition of a $500 timing box, you can quickly get back up to 21-22 mpg.

Gas engines don't appear to be suffering quite as much as diesels, but their economy is going down. HP has been going up as well, but torque hasn't really been moving all that much, with the HP getting stuffed into the higher RPM range of the powerband. I have yet to see a well tuned V10 (either Ford or Dodge) that gets better than 18 mpg empty, and most are sitting at 15-16 mpg. The Hemis and Chev/Ford V8s are as bad, or worse. And forget about towing economy.

And pulling weights? Just compare the torque numbers. They don't lie. Truck for truck, if all you were to do was swap V8, V10, or diesel, the diesel would pull the butt off either gas engine in a heartbeat. There is a reason why gas engines aren't used in over the road tractors.

Regionally, resale will vary, but in my area, gas engined pickups are very difficult to sell. A 2 year old V8 gasser will be worth $12K less than purchase. A 2 year old diesel will lose $4K at the worst (my last trade, my 03, I received $2K less than purchase price). That enhanced trade in value quickly makes up for any increased price. Keeping your truck for 10 years or longer? I've been looking for a 98 diesel, and the cheapest I could find was $22K. This is a truck that was only $33K new. Gas engine 98s are selling for < $10K.

Rod
 
GOOD! Got some good information coming across! If you are a true "Bull Hauler" and are going to put 50,000 to 100,000 plus miles on a truck each year, there is no way a gas burner can compete with a diesel. But! If you haul a little hay. take the cows to the sale barn and put only 15,000 to 20,000 miles on a truck it would be very hard to justify a diesel. I may be comparing apples to oranges; but I am also still running a 1984 Ford diesel (international engine). That thing still gets 18 miles to the gallon empty or pulling a trailer. But I bought it when diesel was 25% CHEAPER than gas. In trying to pull those same Arkansas mountains with a 20 foot trailer and ten cows the Ford diesel (when it was new) just couldn't make it, Had to back down the mountain, go into 4 wheel drive and grandma. Barely made it! Diesels may have gotten better and although my V10 is as rough as a cob it still does more than I need.
 
norriscathy":3r8vuxek said:
GOOD! Got some good information coming across! If you are a true "Bull Hauler" and are going to put 50,000 to 100,000 plus miles on a truck each year, there is no way a gas burner can compete with a diesel. But! If you haul a little hay. take the cows to the sale barn and put only 15,000 to 20,000 miles on a truck it would be very hard to justify a diesel. I may be comparing apples to oranges; but I am also still running a 1984 Ford diesel (international engine). That thing still gets 18 miles to the gallon empty or pulling a trailer. But I bought it when diesel was 25% CHEAPER than gas. In trying to pull those same Arkansas mountains with a 20 foot trailer and ten cows the Ford diesel (when it was new) just couldn't make it, Had to back down the mountain, go into 4 wheel drive and grandma. Barely made it! Diesels may have gotten better and although my V10 is as rough as a cob it still does more than I need.

You are comparing apples to oranges you are probally not old enough to remember the old ford a9 tractors would't pull hat off top of your head with that old four cylinder GAS ENGINE but it was all we had. I agree if you are a hobby farmer you don't need a diesel truck. Diamond made some good points on resale you can't give away a gas burner aroubd here.
 
norriscathy":1vaufv24 said:
I may be comparing apples to oranges; but I am also still running a 1984 Ford diesel (international engine). In trying to pull those same Arkansas mountains with a 20 foot trailer and ten cows the Ford diesel (when it was new) just couldn't make it, Had to back down the mountain, go into 4 wheel drive and grandma.

<chuckle> You're comparing apples to rotten tomatoes with a comparison of a 1984 Ford with the 6.9 non-turbo, non-intercooled diesel and your new v10. Your new V10 gas makes twice the HP and torque of your old truck, so its gonna easily outpull it. However, your new v10 has less torque than any of the new diesels, so its just not going to pull with them, unless you have lower gearing. Its not a diesel vs gas thing, just a numbers thing. :)

Those diesels you were outpulling up the mountains? Quite likely older models. Before 1998, Dodge had no altitude compensation, so power could be down by as much as 40% depending on altitude. From 98 - 2002, the Cummins would then grab a reading at startup and adjust from there, however it wasn't terribly useful on long, tall grades. In 03 they went to system that samples every millisecond. Chevy's had this system since the introduction of the DMax (99), and Fords had this system since the 6.0L. So with the ability to fine-tune the injection process, the current diesels will lose less power in altitude, even less than gassers as the turbo helps to compensate when the naturally aspirated gasser just can't.

Rod
 
DiamondSCattleCo":1urd2ql0 said:
You have to be a little careful on the BTU arguement, as the EPA appears to be trying its steady best to kill diesel fuel economy and/or diesels all together. In order to meet particulate emissions standards, diesels are being forced to inject their fuel later in the injection cycle, at an inefficient point.

I'll use the 05 Cummins as an example as its the simplest system: As the piston reaches TDC (top dead centre), a small shot of fuel is injected to being the combustion process, as the piston reaches TDC, the full shot is injected and injection continues as the piston starts moving down. This is an example of retarded timing. Then, a "clean up" shot of fuel is injected, well past TDC, to finish burning any hard to burn contaminates. About 60% of your fuel is being injected _after_ TDC, which is inefficient, and we lose the enhance BTUs of the diesel.

Now, you advance the timing, even 20 degrees, suddenly we get a 4 mpg boost in economy (empty), another 40 HP or so, but the tree huggers don't love you no more :(

Since 1988, I've owned a new diesel or gas engine pickup truck every year (except 03/04 when I kept my truck for 2 years). On the diesel front, HP/torque has been going up, while economy is dropping. On the Cummins front, the best year for economy was 1998, with most 98s getting an _easy_ 22mpg, when even close to properly tuned and I let many out of the shop getting 24 mpg when perfectly tuned. With the introduction of the new common rail systems on the Cummins, economy went downhill, first in 03 with the 2 shot system, and then further downhill in 04.5 with the 3 shot system. Now empty cruising, a well tuned truck will often only see 18 mpg. However, with the addition of a $500 timing box, you can quickly get back up to 21-22 mpg.

Gas engines don't appear to be suffering quite as much as diesels, but their economy is going down. HP has been going up as well, but torque hasn't really been moving all that much, with the HP getting stuffed into the higher RPM range of the powerband. I have yet to see a well tuned V10 (either Ford or Dodge) that gets better than 18 mpg empty, and most are sitting at 15-16 mpg. The Hemis and Chev/Ford V8s are as bad, or worse. And forget about towing economy.

And pulling weights? Just compare the torque numbers. They don't lie. Truck for truck, if all you were to do was swap V8, V10, or diesel, the diesel would pull the butt off either gas engine in a heartbeat. There is a reason why gas engines aren't used in over the road tractors.

Regionally, resale will vary, but in my area, gas engined pickups are very difficult to sell. A 2 year old V8 gasser will be worth $12K less than purchase. A 2 year old diesel will lose $4K at the worst (my last trade, my 03, I received $2K less than purchase price). That enhanced trade in value quickly makes up for any increased price. Keeping your truck for 10 years or longer? I've been looking for a 98 diesel, and the cheapest I could find was $22K. This is a truck that was only $33K new. Gas engine 98s are selling for < $10K.

Rod

You are patially right on the particulate matter in June of 06 highway diesel has to go to 15 parts per million sulphur. The EPA is after catalytic convertors on diesels sulphur and particulates plugg the convertor.
 
OK; Yall are starting to confuse me! Granted, the gas V8's are almost totally worthless unless your pulling something like a single horse trailer. The Ford V10 develops 457 ft lb of torque at 3,250 rpm and 362 HP at 4750 rpm; while the Ford diesel turns in 570 ft lb of torque at 2,000 and only 325 HP at 3,300. Does this mean the diesel has more pulling power from a dead stop but with more horsepower the gas as the advantage at higher speeds?
 
buckaroo_bif":38ytcx2k said:
I'm so sorry F B but you are mistaken again!!! I just was talking to a salesman the other day at the Ford dealer and this salesman is really sharp! and Never tells a lie!!! And you know what he told me? He assured me that the 6 liter Is made by Mazda and they had so many problems with them and they were not selling that they started putting an International sticker Over the top of the mazda emblem!!! The Ford Corp. is really ashamed for ever becoming affiliated with Mazda. They are gonna drop Mazda in '07 and they are gonna start using Hyundai engines!!! Imagine that a Hyundai in your big bad Ford!!!
I really don't know how or why you would think mazda is a good vehicle. I worked on all makes and models from 1976 through '96 and there is not a sorrier import bulit, except for maybe a Hyundai that is !!!
ROFL!!!! :lol2:
Peel the International sticker off your 6 liter and you will find the original mazda emblem there F B! :mrgreen:

You are full of crap as a Christmas turkey. Get your facts straight before you open that trap and insert your foot. Salesman? You believe a salesman? I have some beach front property I want to sell you in Arizona.

Seems every reply you have shows your lack of knowledge on vehicles of all types. If you worked on them for a living I would hate to drive one after you got through with it. What kind of work did you do? Wash them?
 
norriscathy":39nkt435 said:
Does this mean the diesel has more pulling power from a dead stop but with more horsepower the gas has the advantage at higher speeds?
I'd say that sums it up pretty good. Torque starts a load moving, horsepower keeps it moving.
 
norriscathy":1m2mtwr0 said:
Does this mean the diesel has more pulling power from a dead stop but with more horsepower the gas as the advantage at higher speeds?

Kinda, sorta, but not really :) HP is a function of torque. In effect its the amount of work you can theoretically do over time, as long as the load you are asking it to carry doesn't exceed the amount of torque available. So, your V10, with its higher HP should be able to accelerate faster, when its running at higher RPM, as long as there is enough available torque to allow acceleration. In other words, when loads are lighter, or the truck is empty.

And Buckaroo, nothing hurts me more than to say Flaboy is right (j/k :devil2:), but your salesman has got some _bad_ information. The 6.0L is pure International, through and through, and is actually available in other applications besides Ford.

Rod
 
JHH":368t9to4 said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_engines

Try this link I think it works. May tell the story.

Good link JHH. It's right there in black and white.
 
Thanks for the link, JHH. I didn't realize that Mazda produced either an I4 or V6 diesel, and I've been looking for a diesel to stuff into a Jeep. A Cummins 4BT has a little too much vibration for my liking.

Rod
 
El_Putzo":37nveayj said:
JHH":37nveayj said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_engines

Try this link I think it works. May tell the story.

Good link JHH. It's right there in black and white.

Yeah, it's right there in B&W that Mazda does not make the PowerStroke :lol: I guess you guys know that Ford owns Mazda right?
 
Don't laugh, but we've hauled a lot of hay between places with a F150 V-6. If you don't get it stuck it does better then I would have ever thought. I do have a 02' F350 7.3 and I get about 12 mpg no matter if I'm pulling a load or only the truck. I have a programmer but haven't noticed but a 1-2 mpg difference. My dad has a dodge cummins and I will admit it 'sounds' better then my ford but I think mine is more confortable (I rode all the way from Texas to Washington in Dad's) As for pulling, I don't know which would out pull the other, it's not a fair match up. Mine is a crewcab dually, dad's is a single wheel cab and a 1/2. I guess it would depend on the situation.
 

Latest posts

Top