No doubt. A engine that predominately runs at a constant RPM for extended periods and under a constant load. In heavy commercial trucks that shifting is required, variations in traffic speed, variations in terrain and load, etc, V8 diesels are only a memory. The just didn't work out over time. And no one is even talking about doing it again for heavy trucks.
The ratio may or may not mean the difference when it comes to a working tire. For instance, in heavy commercial trucking operations, a tire for steer or duals usually is in the 275/70R22.5. But the wide based drive and trailer tires are 445/50R22.5. The ratios of sidewall to foot print are substantially different, yet they perform the very same tasks.
Guess it depends on the market.. With the new emissions diesels, I am in the camp that I will never buy a used diesel anymore. I have gotten burned in my commercial stuff with going with used emissions equipped diesels. The cost of either deleting the nonsense or the cost of replacing emissions stuff and keeping it going just isn't worth it. So, when it comes to modern diesels, new is the only game for me. Even then, I would never buy a GM diesel. But that is just me. I prefer inline diesels not V diesels. Inlines are far less complex, easier to work on, etc. Notice how V diesels were tried in large commercial trucks and now there is not a single V diesel made for heavy trucks? They figured things out. Not a Cummins fan either, so that means I will never buy a diesel pickup anytime soon. If I have a need for diesel to move bigger stuff, then I will go with a medium duty and get what I want. The options for spec'ing exactly what one wants the vehicle to be are far more than any brand of pickup. And they will do a heavy 5th wheel camper much better.
Well, there are several reasons why many of us go 2500 vs 1500. 2300 lb of stuff in the back of a 1500 is not a pretty sight. Likewise, hooking up 12,000 lb to a 1500 and doing a lengthy trip is not the best use of a 1500. And the 6.0 doesn't have all that AFM and DI stuff going on. The 1500 justifies the statement... "the more complicated the plumbing, the easier it is to plug up the drain." When it is about fuel economy, that is what my Caddy is for. I use my pickup for what it was intended for and the car for what it was intended for. My pickup is not a daily driver.
I do my own semi truck oil changes and lube jobs, my 2500 is a cake walk. I am loathe to let any dealer or shop do my services. I do my own Xfer and diffs also. I do have a good trans shop do my transmission fluid and filter changes. More a matter of time involved. I have enough irons in the fire, so time is valuable. A complete fluid change and filter change, it is worth it to me to have my preferred shop do it.
To me, the most functional hood would have been one that actually allowed more visibility to the front. The way GM is continuing to grow the front end of their pickup trucks, before long they will be like the Spirit of St. Louis and we all will have to look out the drivers door window to see where we are going. I wish they would bring back the front end of my '98 Chevy 2500.
Cowpie replied to Sierra Dan's topic in 2014 - 2018 Chevy Silverado & GMC SierraWell, one could get a more stable result by using a 5w20 instead of a 0w20. A 5w20 has a much lower burn off rate, uses fewer viscosity modifiers which can shear under pressure, etc.... all of which makes 5w20 a more stable oil. And there are 5w20 oils on the dexos1 approved list, at least a year or two ago when I last checked. And there is not a dealer or OEM on the planet that can tell the difference between a 0w20 and 5w20 via a used oil test if they wanted to go that route. And a 5w20 has a lower burn off rate than a 5w30. Only a 10w30 matches a 5w20 in NOACK burn off rate. One of the reasons my wife's Cadillac has gotten only a 10w30 even though the recommended oil by GM is Mobil 1 5w30. Could be the reason that this 2006 Cadillac is still a real keeper of a car. None of the problems with timing chains and other stuff many other 3.6L owners have experienced. Again, GM could never tell if the oil was a 5w30 or 10w30. Just not possible with used motor oil to determine that. A 30 weight oil is not "thicker" than a 20 weight oil. Viscosity is a measure of resistance to flow, not molecular thickness. There are myriads of examples of folks using a 20 weight year round even towing regularly and the motors are in excellent condition. I use a 30 weight oil year round in my commercial semi truck moving up to 80,000 lb of truck and cargo. Many say that a 40 weight should be used for such things. Well, my Detroit 12.7L with 869,000 miles on it never got the memo. The used oil samples look as good as when it only had 50,000 miles on it, and it uses less oil than most folk's pickup trucks... it uses an average 2 qt of oil in 23,000 mile oil changes. The motor is still all original. A quality 5w20 oil will provide more than ample protection for most folks for motors that call for it. Nothing wrong with using a 30 weight in them either, but not really necessary.
Causes one to wonder when the U.S. OEM's will wake up and do it right. Amminex, a Dutch company, has been making cartridge systems for quite a few years that contain 100% urea in a substrate that eliminates all the DEF nonsense. Cartridges last for a complete oil change interval. Pull one out, put the other in and go. No shelf life issues, no freezing issues, no spilling, etc. Cartridges are recycled and refilled. Simple plug and play cartridges that can be purchased at fueling locations or delivered right to your front door. Since the system is totally functional on engine start up, EGR can be eliminated and still meet EPA limits for NOx at start up. DEF is soooo old school.
I agree, the filter is one thing that gets overlooked for quality. Something like the Amsoil oil filter, M1 filter, Napa Gold/Platinum, etc. Something with a synthetic filter media instead of cellulose will filter to a lower micron and offer an even better beta flow rate. On the oil front, I have never used a official dexos certified oil. I just never worried about it. I use the same brand, Schaeffer, that I get for my commercial trucks. They developed the lubricants for the M1 Abrams tank and the Apache attack helicopter. They even make some specialty products for Shell and Mobil. They have been making lubricants longer than anyone else in N. America... since 1839. I think they might have a good idea on how to lubricate a motor. And they don't waste time fiddling with getting the "official" dexos certification. That is not anything against any other brand. Mobil, Amsoil, Valvoline, etc all make good quality oils. Heck, even Supertech at Wally World is a good oil. If being on the official dexos list is important to someone, then get one of the oils on the list. I just don't worry about it. Dexos is a very good standard, but even it is surpassed in some ways by other specs. dexos certification is not the "gold standard" in oil certifications. I change the oil in my 2500 6.0 once a year. But I never put more than 6000 miles on it in a year. My wife's Caddy, it gets changed every 7000-8000 miles. My commercial stuff, I take to 50% longer than the OEM recommended drain intervals. One of my heavy trucks has 868,000 miles on it and uses less oil than most pickup trucks... about 1 qt in 12,000 miles. Used oil samples on it look as good as when the motor had 50,000 miles on it. I am not into wildly extended drain intervals, but modern oils are more than capable of going longer than most folks take them.
Cowpie replied to Gorehamj's topic in The NewsroomYeah, it is going to call for higher octane fuel. My preference would be using E85 over premium to achieve that. That is one reason I never consider a motor that cannot use E85. Ricardo and Cummins already have proven that a small displacement motor using E85 along with DI and Turbocharging can attain some very respectable power and diesel like fuel economy to boot. And given that I filled the other day with E85 at $1.84 a gallon compared to Premium which was about $3.20, it makes a whale of a difference.
Cowpie replied to Gorehamj's topic in The NewsroomThat is possible, but not always the case. It depends on the efficiency of the design. Also variances in atmospheric conditions can be negated with turbo or supercharging. Also, if one has the power at lower RPM to get the job done, while there may be more fuel being used per combustion cycle, the significantly fewer combustion cycles at lower RPM may actually end up with a lower overall fuel consumption. It is not quite as simple as you suggest. And design comes into play. I refer to heavy diesel engines of the last 30 years, all of them turbocharged, and all of them ECM controlled. Fuel economy has been almost doubled, while at the same time base power numbers have also been increased. it is not uncommon for a heavy diesel motor today to be laying down 1800 lb of torque and 500 hp and getting 8-9 mpg. The typical heavy diesel of 30 years ago was laying down 1500-1600 lb of torque, 350-400 hp, and getting 4-5 mpg. Same fuel, same air, so what is different? The design.
I put on a metal insert on the lower opening of my 2015 2500 within a few weeks of buying it new. A little dirty right now. It is a country pickup that just did a road trip to Wyoming. It has a bug screen over the main grill area also. Can remove it in winter and snap on a winter front if I feel the need.
Most OnlineNewest Member
Jaime Jody Hiroller Manriquez
Who's Online 117 Members, 1 Anonymous, 971 Guests (See full list)
- mn camper guy
- Nick Jacobs
- Truck Guy
- 300 Blackout
- Ben Bassinger
- Capt Bob
- Free home
- Dock Rocker
- Crazy Schooner
- Move Over
- Brain Candle