- Jul 27, 2013
- 4,315
- 1,136
- Truck Year
- Not Listed
- Thread starter
- #21
Dag nab it. I guess the wife and I are in the minority, my RAM just turned over 117K and my wife's Jeep just turned over 145K!!I will comment that will heat things Up, My Guess it will be 55% would buy trucks again until 100K then its gone, 45% will buy again and keep.
You should be fine with the eco 1/2 ton, when I pulled our old Salem FSX toyhauler, about 6.5K lbs. loaded, I averaged 13mpg, we just traded to a heavier XLR toyhauler and in two weeks will take a shakedown trip and will see what the mileage is. Now for the disclaimer, I unknowingly bought a RAM with the 3.92 posi trak and I am running a GDE tune and I installed bypass oil filter and external oil cooler, so my towing experience will be different than someone with the stock 3.55 ratio differential. I did tow to Montana with the stock tune, pre AEM, and the truck lacked guts at altitude and grade. With that being said my sons 2014 Chevy Z71 nets 11 mpg towing his boat, a lot lighter than my FSX. But hey I hear yah, my 1995 Chevy Z71 is still in the driveway with 399K on the clock.Right now, it would mainly be a daily driver. I do tow a trailer sometimes when hauling firewood. I will occasionally tow a boat in the summer. I do want a cab over camper down the road, but I am not sure that would be this rig or the next. My original plan was to buy the 1/2 diesel now and in 5 years or so buy a 3/4 ton for the cab over camper. Right now, I tow fine with my 2002 Chevy Silverado with 236K miles on it.
No problem TC, I too believe that non EGR is the future of Diesel engines. Although I do not blame FCA totally as I know the efforts that Cummins undertook to convince the EPA that the Mandated EGR was not needed. I also agree that lacking meaningful redesign that the VM motor will fall behind competing engines. But I do not deny the same issues that all the small diesels and some of the large diesels share with the VM in Daily Driver capacity. I also agree with GDE that the FCA fuel map engineering committee missed the fuel map market by a mile, resulting in more soot in the exhaust than what is needed.I just don't see How this man (Mauro) can call this engine completely redesigned or the III 3rd gen Motor , I'm open to read correction on the Matter.
Some of Mauro Claims I challenge , the EGR More efficient? Cat develop similar systems back in 2010-12 and dropped them All. Cummins already has NONE external EGR development, This is the future of Dsl, and VM will need to compete or the 1/2 ton Dsl will disappear.
You are welcome to call Me a hater of VM, No I hate that VM has NOT step up and develop the NONE EGR technology, that's whats killing the VM 3.0. Look at deleted Motors these do well, Geez Mauro get off You Butt and fix the QC and the Emissions on the 3.0VM, If you going to talk like a Star you had better step up soon!!!! or Your Beloved 3.0VM is going to be Benched.
This was Cummins in 2016 they did NOT make the 2019 Target date, Rumor has it these New Gen V will be available ( On Road) in late 2020 early 2021.
Reminds me of the 305 SB Chevy, the first 5 years nothing but spun rod bearings and flat cams. GM changed cam profile, hardening process, material, 5 times in 5 years to no avail. Many warranty replacements. Clevite/Michigan 77 made the OEM bearings for this engine, a Clevite engineer teaching a bearing seminar informed us the cam bearing material for the 305 SB was a GM formula different from the identical 350 SB cam bearing which was a Clevite formula. Clevite notified GM at inception that their, Clevite, testing showed the material was too inferior to last, yet GM continued to use it. GM saved $.05 per bearing set to the tune of 250K engines per year, rolling the dice on warranty replacement, and killed the reputation of the 305 SB to the point that when they did change the bearing material they renamed the engine as the 5.0.Its like an act of congress to change the EPA's perceptions on EGR, We all know we'll how congress is acting lately.
If Kieth claims the tuning was No Good , He's most likely correct, The important question would be Why/How its so poorly tuned, IMO with VM its possible
I do think at some point VM will need to design New Power plants to survive.
TC I have looked and rewritten these numbers to try and completely understand your logic and I truthfully don't get it.Caveman Your not alone.
3.0VM Ownership have only three Options, One Upgrade to less parts, Two 80%+ Hwy Use in long term ownership. Three Save at least $8000.00 for likely repairs in long term ownership.
My 2019 5.7 Limited Mixed Hwy/City 720 miles on last two Tanks 13.7MPG, Diesel is $2.60PG / Gas $2.00.
That's 52.55 Gallons Gas @ $111.00, 3.0VM 52.5 at 17.1PM= 897.75 Miles 52.5 At $2.60PM Dsl= $136.50.
$25.50 divide by $2.00, 12.75 Gallons x 13.7= 174.67
897.75 -720= 177.75, Their was O Savings in fuel Cost Gas VS Dsl 3.0 in my last 720 Miles of driving mixed City/Hwy.
If your looking to Save $$$ Buy Gas, it will take 200K Miles+ of Hwy use to just brake even on the Fuel cost only? on the 3.0.
You will NOT re-coup the Dsl engine cost at selling/resale in 1/2 Trucks, The 3/4-1 Tons Dsl keep most of the Power plants upfront cost at resale.
The 3.0 is $5000.00 More than the 3.6 Gas, and $3,500.00 than the 5.7 Gas, It does NOT pencil to Own the 3.0 Unless you drive Hwy and Hope you never have a repair cost 200K miles or Less, and if you have repairs after the 200K Miles your back to the 3.0 Costing $$$ ownership.