Re: Gas vs. Diesel
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: The Mechanic</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: chawk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The EPA ruined diesel engines... The modern diesels are less reliable and burn more fuel, all in the name of a cleaner tailpipe. I've had a bunch of Dodge Cummins trucks over the years. I've ran them pretty hard and they have been good trucks. The only one I still have is an 01 w/ 265k miles and it has been a fantastic truck.
That said, I do not look forward to the day I have to get a new truck. If I HAD to get a newer diesel, it would probably be an 06 duramax. </div></div>
Have to disagree with you chawk. Modern diesels are reliable, quieter, more power per cubic inch, MUCH less polluting. The only drawback is the very new particulate filter that is in the exhaust. Then I will agree that in that particular case the EPA way overstepped its bounds and it uses a lot of fuel to "burn off" the soot on the filter. Also see below.
</div></div>
Quieter, yes, no doubt they are much quieter.
Cleaner, yes they are much cleaner. That is after all the only thing the EPA is concerned with. They obviously don't care about how much extra fuel gets burned in an effort to clean up the tailpipe. DPF decreases mileage significantly. I wonder how much the multiple injections do to negatively impact mileage as well.
More power, per cubic inch... no doubt they do have more power from the factory. But the after market proves that the extra power isn't a benefit of the EPA restrictions. In fact, they could have far more power if it weren't for the EPA restrictions.
There is no way modern diesels are more reliable then older diesels. 12v Cummins with the mechanical injection pump was far more reliable than the vp44 24v's. The vp44 of the 24v can be somewhat problematic, but they are better then the common rail 5.9 Cummins in my opinion. The common rail's have to many injector problems. An injector failure on a common rail engine can lead to a melted piston in no time. Seen it happen a lot.
For ford, the 7.3 was a more reliable engine then the 6.0. The 6.0 was arguably better in it's later years then the 6.4. The new 6.7... time will tell.
GM may be the only one that can say with a straight face they have improved reliability over the years. But look at the diesel engine they offered prior to the duramax.
Almost all these major engine changes were a result of new EPA requirements that needed to be met. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I think the manufacturers would still be using the same old engine were it not for the EPA. I'm saying meeting the ever stricter EPA requirements forces the manufacturers to run at (beyond???) the limits of available technology, and the consumer suffers by getting a less reliable truck.
No argument intended... just my opinion based on what I've seen over the years.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: The Mechanic</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: chawk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The EPA ruined diesel engines... The modern diesels are less reliable and burn more fuel, all in the name of a cleaner tailpipe. I've had a bunch of Dodge Cummins trucks over the years. I've ran them pretty hard and they have been good trucks. The only one I still have is an 01 w/ 265k miles and it has been a fantastic truck.
That said, I do not look forward to the day I have to get a new truck. If I HAD to get a newer diesel, it would probably be an 06 duramax. </div></div>
Have to disagree with you chawk. Modern diesels are reliable, quieter, more power per cubic inch, MUCH less polluting. The only drawback is the very new particulate filter that is in the exhaust. Then I will agree that in that particular case the EPA way overstepped its bounds and it uses a lot of fuel to "burn off" the soot on the filter. Also see below.
</div></div>
Quieter, yes, no doubt they are much quieter.
Cleaner, yes they are much cleaner. That is after all the only thing the EPA is concerned with. They obviously don't care about how much extra fuel gets burned in an effort to clean up the tailpipe. DPF decreases mileage significantly. I wonder how much the multiple injections do to negatively impact mileage as well.
More power, per cubic inch... no doubt they do have more power from the factory. But the after market proves that the extra power isn't a benefit of the EPA restrictions. In fact, they could have far more power if it weren't for the EPA restrictions.
There is no way modern diesels are more reliable then older diesels. 12v Cummins with the mechanical injection pump was far more reliable than the vp44 24v's. The vp44 of the 24v can be somewhat problematic, but they are better then the common rail 5.9 Cummins in my opinion. The common rail's have to many injector problems. An injector failure on a common rail engine can lead to a melted piston in no time. Seen it happen a lot.
For ford, the 7.3 was a more reliable engine then the 6.0. The 6.0 was arguably better in it's later years then the 6.4. The new 6.7... time will tell.
GM may be the only one that can say with a straight face they have improved reliability over the years. But look at the diesel engine they offered prior to the duramax.
Almost all these major engine changes were a result of new EPA requirements that needed to be met. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I think the manufacturers would still be using the same old engine were it not for the EPA. I'm saying meeting the ever stricter EPA requirements forces the manufacturers to run at (beyond???) the limits of available technology, and the consumer suffers by getting a less reliable truck.
No argument intended... just my opinion based on what I've seen over the years.
