Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: SFRT - Frenchy on May 01, 2011, 10:42:42 PM
-
I'm looking to buy a 02-03 1500 with a 4.7. Will this thing tow a two horse trailer? How about a 3800lbs car on a flatbed?
The diesel is out of my price range, but do I really need a 5.7 for towing? Do I need a 2500 over a 1500 whatever the difference is?
How durable are those gasoline engines?
I'm looking around $16k, 60k miles max.
-
A 4.7 half ton will do what you describe. But a bigger engine will do it better and last longer. An engine will last a lot longer when you only use half it's power, then when you're pulling it's guts out all the time. The transmission is a big deal when towing as well, especially if it's and automatic and you tow with it a lot, keep it serviced regularly or your tranny will die prematurely. If you could I'd get the bigger engine, but I don't think you need the 2500 (3/4 ton) for just a 2 horse, or car flatbed, get an equalizer hitch if you are worried about the tongue weight, they help a lot when towing.
-
Ive never owned a pickup but I strongly suggest you look into the RAM 1500 '07 megacab trucks. I drove one for a day and omg its like a limo inside. Super comfortable and its a huge MF'r of a flatbed.
-
I had an 02 4.7L. You would be better off with the bigger engine. The 4.7 will do it but you won't like it. At my altitude the 4.7L was a dog without towing anything.
I am at 6500 feet in Colorado. Your at what 4500 in SLC? Get the bigger engine and make sure it has a good tranny cooler on it. Saggs is right about the power thing.
One of the reasons the company I work for is finally buying bigger rated engines for its semi's. The new trucks aren't at full throttle all the time like the older 435 N14's.
-
Inside isn't a concern on a work truck. It's a truck, not a luxury vehicle :P
I love my Dodge.
1500 with a V8, 360 mmmm
-
I'm looking to buy a 02-03 1500 with a 4.7. Will this thing tow a two horse trailer? How about a 3800lbs car on a flatbed?
The diesel is out of my price range, but do I really need a 5.7 for towing? Do I need a 2500 over a 1500 whatever the difference is?
How durable are those gasoline engines?
I'm looking around $16k, 60k miles max.
from my limited experience on these engines, it'll pull both that you mentioned. the rear may sag slightly with the car trailer. be fure to install a transmission cooler.
-
Inside isn't a concern on a work truck. It's a truck, not a luxury vehicle :P
I love my Dodge.
1500 with a V8, 360 mmmm
if you can have both why not?
the megacab's rear area turns into what is literally a sofabed :devil
-
I love my Dodge.
Me too!
(http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/9865/truck.png)
-
I'm looking to buy a 02-03 1500 with a 4.7. Will this thing tow a two horse trailer? How about a 3800lbs car on a flatbed?
The diesel is out of my price range, but do I really need a 5.7 for towing? Do I need a 2500 over a 1500 whatever the difference is?
How durable are those gasoline engines?
I'm looking around $16k, 60k miles max.
The entire .7 family of engines are garbage, with the 5.7 being the most "reliable". The 3.7 and 4.7 are inferior engines, right down the very thin oil pans. If you can get the 5.7 and want a Dodge, get the 5.7.
-
The entire .7 family of engines are garbage, with the 5.7 being the most "reliable". The 3.7 and 4.7 are inferior engines, right down the very thin oil pans. If you can get the 5.7 and want a Dodge, get the 5.7.
i've only had the opportunity to work on a few of the 4.7's. one of them i had to do a timing chain at around 78k miles. it was easier than it looked like it was gonna be.
it was kinda funny, as the shop owner where i worked came out in the bay when i fired it up, and asked me if it was done. i told him yea.....and he goes "where's all the extra bolts? there's no way you did that that fast." i called him a couple expletives, and he laughed at me for that......then gave me the crapiest tow truck in the fleet to take home for the night. :rofl
couple customers that have them are happy so far........
-
What are the recommended Dodge Truck engine options for general duty?
-
My brother's Boss' construction company bought strictly Dodge trucks. I would say 5 1500's, back in 06.
The one my brother drove all the time was diesel. The trucks always seemed to be in the shop
for one thing or another. Seemed like there was always something with the throttle body on both gas and
diesel engines.
<S> Oz
-
All I can comment on is my R/T's engine has been flawless. One other thing to think about is the rear diff. I think the 9 1/4 only comes with the 5.9 standard.
-
Go with the 5.7 and a 2500 is the better option for what you are wanting to pull. If you are going used why not a Chevy or Ford?
-
Now i'm driving a 2005 dodge 1500 4.7 with the towing package and gets about 15mpg. Wouldn't want to pull much of a load with that setup. I got it last summer for $10,500 and it has not been to the shop. Before that, I drove a 2002 dodge 2500 standard trans with the diesel for a few months. Lots of power. Gas milage stayed around 20mpg. I really liked driving it, but it was noisey and had no options. Before that, I drove a 1999 chevy 4x4 2500 with the 6.0. IT had good power, but only got about 12mpg.
-
I had a 2001 Chevy 2500 4x4. Loved that truck but the mpg was killing me later on. Why you could only get them with 4:10s was such a bone head move.
-
Ford makes good trucks, the f150 series should be perfect for you
-
Ford or Chevy from those years, I wouldn't trust the Dodge trannys.
-
I'm looking to buy a 02-03 1500 with a 4.7. Will this thing tow a two horse trailer? How about a 3800lbs car on a flatbed?
The diesel is out of my price range, but do I really need a 5.7 for towing? Do I need a 2500 over a 1500 whatever the difference is?
How durable are those gasoline engines?
I'm looking around $16k, 60k miles max.
I never owned a dodge. The truck/engine combo you describe will tow the horse trailer and car trailer. It will be fine as long as you don't pull that often. Even less when in hilly terrain.
There is much more than engine ability when it comes to towing.The 1500 is a half ton capacity vehicle. The 2500 is a 3/4 ton towing capacity. They have a different ability of weight in bed or on trailer. They differ in trailer tongue weight ability too.
The 2500 has heavier springs and axles and other items.
You can improve the 1500s capability with booster springs and/or airbags. You can make the truck haul more to an extent but you may have axle/seal problems if you overload it too much.
-
My mom drives a 2005 2500 w/ diesel and she gets about 22mph highway, and can pull a 4 horse trailer without any issue, or it can tow a 18 foot flatbed with 120 bales of hay on it. Never been in the shop for anything major.
-
My 2006 towing guide lists the 1500 dodge with the 4.7 to be able to handle a pretty wide range of loads. The lowest rating was 3800 lbs all the way up to 7400 lbs towing. It all depends on what options are in the truck as to what load it is rated to tow. You need to let me know what transmission (auto or standard) gear ratio and if it has a towing package as an installed option and what body style (extended cab or single seat) to narrow it down. Of course this is also a later model data range I am looking at.
-
Engine size is one thing. Braking has been the one thing no one has mentioned.
-
Personally, I would do the Cummins. If you look around and shop right you can easily do a Diesel for less then 16k. As long as the body is in good shape the vehicle will run forever if its a diesel.
back to your OP. I dont know what transmission your lookin for, but deffinitly try finding a Manual. if you can find a 6-speed get it, 5 speed should do it though. Although im not sure if Dodge makes a 1500 with a standard....
:salute Good luck sir!
-
Engine size is one thing. Braking has been the one thing no one has mentioned.
i skipped over that, as with my fords, i've never needed anything outside of stock brakes pulling my car trailer. i did however just buy an enclosed trailer, and will more than likely install the electric brake controller for that one.
-
Don't be limited to Dodge. Chevy and Ford have great trucks in the 00s range. My 03 2500 4 door is still running great.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s162/spikesx/20110502153648-1.jpg)
It's a workhorse and something like this or the equiv would be perfect for your needs. We have pulled lots of stuff with it over distances. Worst part is the gas mileage with the bigger trucks.
Edit: Plus they're mean lookin :)
-
Don't be limited to Dodge. Chevy and Ford have great trucks in the 00s range. My 03 2500 4 door is still running great.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s162/spikesx/20110502153648-1.jpg)
It's a workhorse and something like this or the equiv would be perfect for your needs. We have pulled lots of stuff with it over distances. Worst part is the gas mileage with the bigger trucks.
Edit: Plus they're mean lookin :)
Exactly why you dont buy Chevy :lol
Ford is good..but the only good thing about them is their Powerstroke...and the new ones aint what the 7.3l were.
right now dodge has the truck world by the nuts....
-
Engine size is one thing. Braking has been the one thing no one has mentioned.
I assumed any truck he got would have the towing package with trailer brake controller and "tow/haul" mode on the tranny (uses the tranny to help braking down steep hills) if not then yes, you need to definitely get a brake controller installed. Also like I mentioned an equalizer hitch is a worthwhile investment if you plan on towing much, it will take a lot of load off the rear springs, and make the truck ride much better.
Personally, I would do the Cummins. If you look around and shop right you can easily do a Diesel for less then 16k. As long as the body is in good shape the vehicle will run forever if its a diesel.
back to your OP. I dont know what transmission your lookin for, but deffinitly try finding a Manual. if you can find a 6-speed get it, 5 speed should do it though. Although im not sure if Dodge makes a 1500 with a standard....
:salute Good luck sir!
The Cummins diesel is great, unfortunately you can't get it in a 1500, and the 2500 is really overkill for what he's talking about towing. Also it would be very difficult to find a standard transmission in any late model truck, in the past 7-8 years if you've wanted a new pickup with a manual tranny you've had to special order it.
You don't need a manual though, the newer automatics are just as good or better for towing then a manual, just keep a close eye on the ATF and service it regularly as the fluid will heat up and break down quicker under heavy load. (If the ATF starts to turn brown time to change it pronto) Even many of the newer semi tractors (Volvo, Freightliner, Kenworth) come with automatics now.
PS. For you brand loyalists out there, why even be limited to Dodge, Chevy or Ford. All he needs is a half-ton pickup, and Nissan and Toyota now make excellent half-tons as well. I'm not a brand loyalist, they all make great trucks.
FYIW, my father has an '04 Dodge Cummins 2500, my brother has an '03 Ford F-350 Powerstroke and my workplace had a '05 Chevy 3500 Duramax. I've driven all 3 of them quite a lot, and they all are great trucks. Some are stronger in certain areas then others, but it's mostly a matter of preference. eg, the Powerstroke will do high speed interstate cruising better, but the Cummins will tow up steep grades better, and is more fuel efficient. The Isuzu/Duramax engine in the Chevy is great to, and the Allison tranny in the Chevy is the best transmission, but I don't like the interior of the Chevy. If I were to magically design my perfect diesel pickup it would be a mix of all three... with a Caterpillar engine :aok
-
I assumed any truck he got would have the towing package with trailer brake controller and "tow/haul" mode on the tranny (uses the tranny to help braking down steep hills) if not then yes, you need to definitely get a brake controller installed. Also like I mentioned an equalizer hitch is a worthwhile investment if you plan on towing much, it will take a lot of load off the rear springs, and make the truck ride much better.
The Cummins diesel is great, unfortunately you can't get it in a 1500, and the 2500 is really overkill for what he's talking about towing. sadly your right. Also it would be very difficult to find a standard transmission in any late model truck, in the past 7-8 years if you've wanted a new pickup with a manual tranny you've had to special order it.Dodge still makes a Manual tranny standard. you have an option of manual OR automatic.. one more reason to stay with dodge :bolt:
You don't need a manual though, the newer automatics are just as good or better for towing then a manual, just keep a close eye on the ATF and service it regularly as the fluid will heat up and break down quicker under heavy load. (If the ATF starts to turn brown time to change it pronto) more work then required.. Manuals get better fuel economy too Even many of the newer semi tractors (Volvo, Freightliner, Kenworth) come with automatics now.
PS. For you brand loyalists out there, why even be limited to Dodge, Chevy or Ford. All he needs is a half-ton pickup, and Nissan and Toyota now make excellent half-tons as well. I'm not a brand loyalist, they all make great trucks.
FYIW, my father has an '04 Dodge Cummins 2500, my brother has an '03 Ford F-350 Powerstroke and my workplace had a '05 Chevy 3500 Duramax. I've driven all 3 of them quite a lot, and they all are great trucks. Some are stronger in certain areas then others, but it's mostly a matter of preference. eg, the Powerstroke will do high speed interstate cruising better, but the Cummins will tow up steep grades better, and is more fuel efficient. The Isuzu/Duramax engine in the Chevy is great to, and the Allison tranny in the Chevy is the best transmission, but I don't like the interior of the Chevy. If I were to magically design my perfect diesel pickup it would be a mix of all three... with a Caterpillar engine :aok
Bold says it all.
-
Exactly why you dont buy Chevy :lol
Ford is good..but the only good thing about them is their Powerstroke...and the new ones aint what the 7.3l were.
right now dodge has the truck world by the nuts....
You are smoking some good stuff.
-
You are smoking some good stuff.
why do you say? not lookin for an argument, just curious.
-
All big trucks are bad on gas.
-
All big trucks are bad on gas.
sadly so.
-
Some older pics of my baby. :)
(http://i750.photobucket.com/albums/xx147/MarineUS/1996%20Dodge%20Ram%201500%20SLT/T1.jpg)
(http://i750.photobucket.com/albums/xx147/MarineUS/1996%20Dodge%20Ram%201500%20SLT/t.jpg)
(http://i750.photobucket.com/albums/xx147/MarineUS/1996%20Dodge%20Ram%201500%20SLT/118_0307.jpg)
-
Some older pics of my baby. :)
(http://i750.photobucket.com/albums/xx147/MarineUS/1996%20Dodge%20Ram%201500%20SLT/T1.jpg)
(http://i750.photobucket.com/albums/xx147/MarineUS/1996%20Dodge%20Ram%201500%20SLT/t.jpg)
(http://i750.photobucket.com/albums/xx147/MarineUS/1996%20Dodge%20Ram%201500%20SLT/118_0307.jpg)
selling her? ill take it...
-
All big trucks are bad on gas.
Yep.
-
I have an 04 Silverado 2500 4dr that runs like a friggin top, no issues in the 100k miles i have on it, 1 set of brakes, tires but thats it. Im meticulous on (preventive) maintence though (Oil changes, trans flush etc). Mine looks exactly like Spikes (color and all) She rides like a Cadillac (no bouncing that I hated in my Ford F250) and i could pull a house if i wanted too lol.
Regarding saving gas, one thing to remember that if you tow something with an underpowered truck, you could use more gas then you would with a truck with a larger engine as the little engine has to work harder......so really what are you saving. From everything ive ever known, over working the little motors will burn more fuel. (I might be wrong though, Cap may know better) Im also sure you could find a nice Silverado 1500HD as well, for the price ur looking to spend.
The 1500HD came out in model year 2001. It is a 2500 truck with 2500 frame and axles, and brakes. It is a lot different than regular/plain 1500, 6 lugs vs 8 lugs for example. One of the reasons I heard is that in 2001 Ford came out with the supercrew F150 so GM to compete with that rebadged the 2500 chasis as 1500 HD. In 2001 GM did not have the light 1500 Crew cab yet developed. Please note that in 2004 1500hd was not offered, it really was as a crewcab 2500 (not 2500HD), so basicaly from 2001-2003 you had 1500HD, then 2004 same truck was 2500 (non HD), and then in 2005 they came back as 1500HD. Also if you look at the GVWR, the 1500HD and 2500 were always 8600 lbs, while the light 1500 were always 6400-6800 lbs. The 2500HD are 9200 lbs, and 3500 are in the 11,000 range.
This is not a slam on the Dodge, Im just a Silverado guy. I have 2 My O4 and an 2010 4dr, both flawless running vech.
-
I drive a 1998 Dodge Ram 1500 and it's a great truck overall. However, like several others have said don't trust the Chrysler transmissions, mine failed at around 110,000 miles. Even after having to replace the tranny I still wouldn't get rid of this truck.
-
selling her? ill take it...
haha at the time of the pics I was, but I couldn't do it. :P
-
I drive a 1998 Dodge Ram 1500 and it's a great truck overall. However, like several others have said don't trust the Chrysler transmissions, mine failed at around 110,000 miles. Even after having to replace the tranny I still wouldn't get rid of this truck.
dodge does have some bad factory parts. the cummins in general have horrible injector pumps off the floor. no small bill kepin them runnin if something goes.
-
haha at the time of the pics I was, but I couldn't do it. :P
it have a solid body in it?
i would jerry rig a cummins to fit in there and put a 6 speed manual in it. how many people know of a 1500 with a diesel?
-
Bold says it all.
Manual trannys do not get better mileage or perform better. In days of old that was correct... but no longer.
My Chevy 2500 HD Crew with Duramax / Allison combo has never been in the shop. Heck... it has 94000 miles or so on it and has never even needed a brake job. It has pulled a 22' and 28" goose loaded on many occassions. It has also pulled the heck out of a 24' Vindicator boat.
-
it have a solid body in it?
Nope *SCRATCH*
Wrong forum xD
Yes, solid body haha
-
Manual trannys do not get better mileage or perform better. In days of old that was correct... but no longer.
bring back the old school. especially if this is the case.
-
Nope
bondo, eh?
-
bring back the old school. especially if this is the case.
Why would you want to make tansmissions less efficent?
Well everyone getting the pictures out.....
(http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q96/Shuff_photos/059.jpg)
(http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q96/Shuff_photos/045.jpg)
-
Why would you want to make tansmissions less efficent?
id rather spend a little more on a little extra maitnence every once in a while then a little more at the pump every week, no?
-
id rather spend a little more on a little extra maitnence every once in a while then a little more at the pump every week, no?
Your not making sense. You go back to the way the trannys were and you'll be paying more at the pumps. Even the manuals were not as good as today.
-
bondo, eh?
haha sorry, had to edit it! I was on the wrong forum lol!
Solid body :lol
-
Your not making sense. You go back to the way the trannys were and you'' be paying more at the pumps. Even the manuals were not as good as today.
then i got confused somewhere along the line. sorry about that.
defintily appears as though manuals get better fuel economy. my mom had a Toyota 4runner 5 speed...and she filled it up less then a family friend who had an automatic. mind you, same year (1999).
-
haha sorry, had to edit it! I was on the wrong forum lol!
Solid body :lol
it hapens :lol
-
Why would you want to make tansmissions less efficent?
Well everyone getting the pictures out.....
(http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q96/Shuff_photos/059.jpg)
(http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q96/Shuff_photos/045.jpg)
Buc-ees is awesome! We are getting one here in New Braunfels
-
Why would you want to make tansmissions less efficent?
Well everyone getting the pictures out.....
(http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q96/Shuff_photos/059.jpg)
(http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q96/Shuff_photos/045.jpg)
thats a nice truck.
-
then i got confused somewhere along the line. sorry about that.
defintily appears as though manuals get better fuel economy. my mom had a Toyota 4runner 5 speed...and she filled it up less then a family friend who had an automatic. mind you, same year (1999).
Two folks.... two different miles driven...... two different driving styles. That is not a good way to compare :)
Buc-ees is awesome! We are getting one here in New Braunfels
We stop at the one across from Love's on I-10 when we go to San Antonio or New Braunfels. The one in the pic is down towards Galveston. We were on a HPD cruise with a bunch of cars and trucks. This club member in a camaro had a girlfriend that liked my truck and she took the pic.
-
Two folks.... two different miles driven...... two different driving styles. That is not a good way to compare :)
theyre females...need we say more?
-
theyre females...need we say more?
Looks around..... wife's not in view...... yup your correct :rofl
thats a nice truck.
Thanks!
-
Why would you want to make tansmissions less efficent?
Well everyone getting the pictures out.....
(http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q96/Shuff_photos/059.jpg)
(http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q96/Shuff_photos/045.jpg)
Beauty queen. :D
-
Looks around..... wife's not in view...... yup your correct :rofl
Thanks!
:rofl
-
All big trucks are bad on gas.
Not really, think about pure efficiency and not just MPG.
Just for fun I looked up some stats.
2011 Honda Accord V6
-Weighs: 3559 lbs
-Combined MPG: 24
Do the math, and that's burning 1 gallon of fuel, to move 148 lbs, 24 miles.
Now consider my fathers, '04 Dodge 2500 4 door pickup towing his travel trailer, which is about 15,000lbs GVW and he gets ~ 14mpg towing it.
Do the math and that's burning 1 gallon of fuel, to move 1071 lbs, 14 miles.
Now which more efficient?
Now... .... if your talking about people driving a pickup as a commuter, I agree, that's not very efficient.
EDITED: for math fail.
-
Not really, think about pure efficiency and not just MPG.
Just for fun I looked up some stats.
2011 Honda Accord V6
-Weighs: 3559 lbs
-Combined MPG: 24
Do the math, and that's burning 1 gallon of fuel to move 148 lbs 1 mile.
Now consider my fathers, '04 Dodge 2500 4 door pickup towing his travel trailer, which is about 15,000lbs GVW and he gets ~ 14mpg towing it.
Do the math and that's burning 1 gallon of fuel to move 1071 lbs 1 mile.
So if you look at it that way, a big diesel pickup is nearly 10X as efficient, as a 4 door sedan.
Now... .... if your talking about people driving a pickup as a commuter, I agree, that's not very efficient.
I never thought of it like this. not motivated to do the math, but i reckon you divided weight b average fuel economy?
-
I never thought of it like this. not motivated to do the math, but i reckon you divided weight b average fuel economy?
Actually CRAP! I just realized I did that math wrong, hold on, I need to think about this more. :lol
-
Saggs, you could figure too though... put the same trailer on my brothers truck and it wont be the same. his 98 ram 2500 Cummins 24 valve is the furthest thing from stock....but he has sigificantly larger injector lines, so it would be worse then bad as far as efficiency goes.
-
I have an 04 Silverado 2500 4dr that runs like a friggin top, no issues in the 100k miles i have on it, 1 set of brakes, tires but thats it. Im meticulous on (preventive) maintence though (Oil changes, trans flush etc). Mine looks exactly like Spikes (color and all) She rides like a Cadillac (no bouncing that I hated in my Ford F250) and i could pull a house if i wanted too lol.
Regarding saving gas, one thing to remember that if you tow something with an underpowered truck, you could use more gas then you would with a truck with a larger engine as the little engine has to work harder......so really what are you saving. From everything ive ever known, over working the little motors will burn more fuel. (I might be wrong though, Cap may know better) Im also sure you could find a nice Silverado 1500HD as well, for the price ur looking to spend.
The 1500HD came out in model year 2001. It is a 2500 truck with 2500 frame and axles, and brakes. It is a lot different than regular/plain 1500, 6 lugs vs 8 lugs for example. One of the reasons I heard is that in 2001 Ford came out with the supercrew F150 so GM to compete with that rebadged the 2500 chasis as 1500 HD. In 2001 GM did not have the light 1500 Crew cab yet developed. Please note that in 2004 1500hd was not offered, it really was as a crewcab 2500 (not 2500HD), so basicaly from 2001-2003 you had 1500HD, then 2004 same truck was 2500 (non HD), and then in 2005 they came back as 1500HD. Also if you look at the GVWR, the 1500HD and 2500 were always 8600 lbs, while the light 1500 were always 6400-6800 lbs. The 2500HD are 9200 lbs, and 3500 are in the 11,000 range.
This is not a slam on the Dodge, Im just a Silverado guy. I have 2 My O4 and an 2010 4dr, both flawless running vech.
two things i noted.
1)preventive maintenance. THIS one thing, alone will save you THOUSANDS over the lifetime of your vehicle. smart people do it meticulously. somewhat smart people will bichc and whine about the cost of it, but then they'll do it. not smart people(otherwise known as stupid people) will brush it off saying it's just the shops trying to make more money off of them.
2) it is true. while the smaller engine may do you better when you're not pulling, you will pay when you hook a load up to the vehicle. you'll work the smaller engine MUCH harder on acceleration, and believe it or not, on deceleration. as you;re cruising, that little engine will be struggling, while a larger one may be just idling along with no effort.
consider it like the mini-suv's you see. you can get them with 4 or 6 cylinder engines. most people i've dealt with report more fuel consumption from the little 4 banger, because it's always working, as opposed to the 6 banger that hardly works to accelerate the vehicle in the first place....then just cruises along enjoying itself.
also, something i hadn't much thought of. baily has VERY valid points concerning 1500 vs 2500. if you;re going to be towing often, spend the extra money and get the 2500, and either go with ford or chevy.
while i do like the dodges, experience has shown me that fords and chevys are much more reliable towing heavy loads. they've got ginormous brakes, generally very large disc brakes at all 4 corners, which you will appreciate when the time comes to stop quickly.
while i'm a ford nut, you will find that the chevys have better transmissions than the fords, although you'll stilll want to add a transmission cooler for the towing.
when you go to the 2500 series, you're gonna have a stronger frame, more capable springs, and much better shocks than the 1500, and the differential........whelp.... you'd need a high torque twin turbo diesel to break it.
another thing that i may have missed, but haven;'t seen......with the 2500, you'll most likely be on truck rims, at least 16", with LT 10 ply tires mounted. you WANT those tires for towing. anything less is asking for trouble.
-
I drive a 1998 Dodge Ram 1500 and it's a great truck overall. However, like several others have said don't trust the Chrysler transmissions, mine failed at around 110,000 miles. Even after having to replace the tranny I still wouldn't get rid of this truck.
chrysler transmissions seem to fail around 100k. i have a customer with a durango, and a 1500 ramvan....both with autos, both model year 2000. they bought them both at the same time.
the durango failed at 98k, the van 3 weeks later at around 101k.
-
bring back the old school. especially if this is the case.
nah.....todays manual transmissions are lightyears from the old manuals, as are the automatics.
-
why do you say? not lookin for an argument, just curious.
Neither am I bud.
Common Weakpoints in General: (I'm talking 4x4's here). I'm leaving out Transmissions as these are hit or miss and more indicative of driver habits, on the whole (Although Dodge transmissions rarely last 100k).
Dodge - Engines, Transfer Cases and their still useless Unit Bearing Front Axle Assemblies (94 and up).
GM - Transfer Cases and the 5.3/6.0L gas engine.
Ford - Transfer Cases. They finally worked the bugs out of the 5.4L 3V so that is no longer a problem.
Tell me again how Dodge has them by the nuts? The Unit Bearing Assemblies are junk and the Aftermarket UPGRADE costs around $1000. Hmm, you'd think they just "do it right and produce without the Unit Bearing"? Again. The entire ".7 family of engines" are junk and their customers deserve better. But the Unit Bearing Assembly itself eliminates them from any "prize". I still laugh when folks lift those Dodge's and don't spend the money on an upgrade (90% of them don't) and end up shelling out more money instead.
As far as "90's model trucks" give me either a GM (either brand) with a 350 or a Ford with a 302/351 instead.
But there is no way in hell that Dodge has either Company in their cross hairs. If they did, they sneezed and lost sight of their target. Sorry, but I am a Ford guy and am willing to be unbiased in this case. But Ford and GM are where it's at in trucks. While my pop gets the Z Plan for Ford, I would be content with a GMC/Chevy pickup. Like I said before, Dodge's customers deserve a better product than they are purchasing and it's a damn shame their own customers are being snowballed.
As for Nissan and Toyota in saggs post. Toyota cannot even design a durable door/tailgate handle, so my interest in them would cease. Nissan? Some of worst reliability numbers across their vehicle line. As they have gotten better over the last few years, I wouldn't go near them, much less spend a dollar on one.
I have an 04 Silverado 2500 4dr that runs like a friggin top, no issues in the 100k miles i have on it, 1 set of brakes, tires but thats it. Im meticulous on (preventive) maintence though (Oil changes, trans flush etc). Mine looks exactly like Spikes (color and all) She rides like a Cadillac (no bouncing that I hated in my Ford F250) and i could pull a house if i wanted too lol.
That is because the F-250 is leaf-sprung (unless you're talking about a 99+ Coil, which then I would have to question). The GMC is IFS, so the ride would be smoother.
-
two things i noted.
1)preventive maintenance. THIS one thing, alone will save you THOUSANDS over the lifetime of your vehicle. smart people do it meticulously. somewhat smart people will bichc and whine about the cost of it, but then they'll do it. not smart people(otherwise known as stupid people) will brush it off saying it's just the shops trying to make more money off of them.
2) it is true. while the smaller engine may do you better when you're not pulling, you will pay when you hook a load up to the vehicle. you'll work the smaller engine MUCH harder on acceleration, and believe it or not, on deceleration. as you;re cruising, that little engine will be struggling, while a larger one may be just idling along with no effort.
consider it like the mini-suv's you see. you can get them with 4 or 6 cylinder engines. most people i've dealt with report more fuel consumption from the little 4 banger, because it's always working, as opposed to the 6 banger that hardly works to accelerate the vehicle in the first place....then just cruises along enjoying itself.
also, something i hadn't much thought of. baily has VERY valid points concerning 1500 vs 2500. if you;re going to be towing often, spend the extra money and get the 2500, and either go with ford or chevy.
while i do like the dodges, experience has shown me that fords and chevys are much more reliable towing heavy loads. they've got ginormous brakes, generally very large disc brakes at all 4 corners, which you will appreciate when the time comes to stop quickly.
while i'm a ford nut, you will find that the chevys have better transmissions than the fords, although you'll stilll want to add a transmission cooler for the towing.
when you go to the 2500 series, you're gonna have a stronger frame, more capable springs, and much better shocks than the 1500, and the differential........whelp.... you'd need a high torque twin turbo diesel to break it.
another thing that i may have missed, but haven;'t seen......with the 2500, you'll most likely be on truck rims, at least 16", with LT 10 ply tires mounted. you WANT those tires for towing. anything less is asking for trouble.
Also on the "smaller engine". You are more than likely at a higher RPM and that Transmission is now working overtime. I do like the improved reliability of the 4L60/80E's.
-
Nope, 2002 F250 Diesel.......thing shook me around like the last piece of popcorn in a hot air popper. Great work truck though, I abused the heck out of it, and she took everything i could throw at her. Guess im just gettin :old:, and like the nice smooth ride of the Silverados. :lol
I actually like my 04 more than my wifes 4dr 2010. My wife fell in love with mine, to the point that she use to drive it to work everyday (I have a company car) I knew it was time to get her her own when i jumped into my truck on the weekend to go grab some lumber, and there was a Longaberger basket trashcan on the floor under the radio, and a puppy dog air freshener hanging from the rear view. The entire truck smelled like strawberries. For fear of being laughed right out of the lumber yard, We went and got her her own about a month later :lol
-
Nope, 2002 F250 Diesel.......thing shook me around like the last piece of popcorn in a hot air popper. Great work truck though, I abused the heck out of it, and she took everything i could throw at her. Guess im just gettin :old:, and like the nice smooth ride of the Silverados. :lol
I actually like my 04 more than my wifes 4dr 2010. My wife fell in love with mine, to the point that she use to drive it to work everyday (I have a company car) I knew it was time to get her her own when i jumped into my truck on the weekend to go grab some lumber, and there was a Longaberger basket trashcan on the floor under the radio, and a puppy dog air freshener hanging from the rear view. The entire truck smelled like strawberries. For fear of being laughed right out of the lumber yard, We went and got her her own about a month later :lol
Crotchety bastage! :devil
-
Neither am I bud.
Common Weakpoints in General: (I'm talking 4x4's here). I'm leaving out Transmissions as these are hit or miss and more indicative of driver habits, on the whole (Although Dodge transmissions rarely last 100k).
Dodge - Engines, Transfer Cases and their still useless Unit Bearing Front Axle Assemblies (94 and up).
GM - Transfer Cases and the 5.3/6.0L gas engine.
Ford - Transfer Cases. Their inner AND outer bearings are packed together in one unit. to replace either the inner OR outer bearing you have to replace the other..which is beyond pointless if its still perfectly good. Got a good buddy who used to work o nFords exclusively and he mentioned this was a piss poor design. M dad had to have his bearings redone and almost watermelon when he heard this. They finally worked the bugs out of the 5.4L 3V so that is no longer a problem.
Tell me again how Dodge has them by the nuts? The Unit Bearing Assemblies are junk and the Aftermarket UPGRADE costs around $1000. Hmm, you'd think they just "do it right and produce without the Unit Bearing"? Again. The entire ".7 family of engines" are junk and their customers deserve better. But the Unit Bearing Assembly itself eliminates them from any "prize". I still laugh when folks lift those Dodge's and don't spend the money on an upgrade (90% of them don't) and end up shelling out more money instead.
As far as "90's model trucks" give me either a GM (either brand) with a 350 or a Ford with a 302/351 instead.
But there is no way in hell that Dodge has either Company in their cross hairs. If they did, they sneezed and lost sight of their target. Sorry, but I am a Ford guy and am willing to be unbiased in this case. But Ford and GM are where it's at in trucks. While my pop gets the Z Plan for Ford, I would be content with a GMC/Chevy pickup. Like I said before, Dodge's customers deserve a better product than they are purchasing and it's a damn shame their own customers are being snowballed. I'm a ford and dodge man. While i may prefer Dodge a little more, Ford isnt a bad vehicle. I cant stand Chevy or GM though.
As for Nissan and Toyota in saggs post. Toyota cannot even design a durable door/tailgate handle, so my interest in them would cease. Nissan? Some of worst reliability numbers across their vehicle line. As they have gotten better over the last few years, I wouldn't go near them, much less spend a dollar on one. +1
That is because the F-250 is leaf-sprung (unless you're talking about a 99+ Coil, which then I would have to question)my dad has a 2000 F250..rides like a tank. he has beefier Leaf springs in it, but nothing is smoothing it out.. The GMC is IFS, so the ride would be smoother.
-
Crotchety bastage! :devil
Just turned 40..........yep about right there Jay :rofl
-
Fords bearings are not the "Dodge One Piece Unit Bearings". I'm talking right here, right now, go to the showroom. If we're talking "Vacuum Hub Assemblies" they suck in General.
-
Fords bearings are not the "Dodge One Piece Unit Bearings". I'm talking right here, right now, go to the showroom. If we're talking "Vacuum Hub Assemblies" they suck in General.
Dodge is doin it too now?
-
Dodge is doin it too now?
They have been since 94.
-
They have been since 94.
didnt know that. then again, im not big into the suspension aspect of Dodge..more of the engine/fuelsystem/exhaust kinda person.
you have enlightened me. thank you :rock
-
didnt know that. then again, im not big into the suspension aspect of Dodge..more of the engine/fuelsystem/exhaust kinda person.
you have enlightened me. thank you :rock
well...not to be a dick....but compared to ford and chevy, dodges v-8's suck, as do their fuel systems, and computer control systems. actually, their exhaust isn't too good either.
-
well...not to be a dick....but compared to ford and chevy, dodges v-8's suck why im a Cummins freak :aok, as do their fuel systems, and computer control systems. actually, their exhaust isn't too good either.
i agree though, Furl systems arent so hot... as for Computer Ive only heard good and seen good on the Cummins. as stated..im a Cummins freak. Eff Dodge's v8 gas job. I6 is all we need :rock
-
i agree though, Furl systems arent so hot... as for Computer Ive only heard good and seen good on the Cummins. as stated..im a Cummins freak. Eff Dodge's v8 gas job. I6 is all we need :rock
well unfortunately, i can't argue with the cummins....i pretty much know nothing about dodge diesels......given the opportunity though, i'll learn.
-
Actually the dodge ECUs are more sophisticated than ford and almost equal to GM but suffer from inferior components.
More sophisticated does not necessarily mean better as evidenced by my only having found 2 bad toyota ecus in 31 years of wrenching..........but I did see 15 out of about 1400 sent in having a failure while the rates were much higher in hondas, chrysler, ford, and GM.
Don't get me started on mitsubishi because I fully believe that most in service will suffer a component failure within 6 years of being manufactured though the newer stuff has proven more robust.
Of course, I've replaced tons of ICP sensor circuits and IPR drivers in fords as well as 02 sensor heater circuits on the gas cars but I normally find those parts fine in the chrysler units with chrysler suffering from the 555 timer units and the 5v regulator burning out.
GM? they have problem with the conformal coating swelling and popping surface mount components right off the board as well as the same cold solder joints as ford and chrysler suffer where the connector legs meet the board.
Shake the ecu you can often hear loose components rattling around in the box.
-
well unfortunately, i can't argue with the cummins....i pretty much know nothing about dodge diesels......given the opportunity though, i'll learn.
same idea..but its compression not spark, and the fuel system is different. ITs more complex then that, but it needs air like a normal gas engine, it needs coolant, oil, all the normal stuff. Turbos are another thing they need. If your lookin to learn a lot about them quick register to www . cumminsforum.com. more info then youll ever need.
:salute
-
same idea..but its compression not spark, and the fuel system is different. ITs more complex then that, but it needs air like a normal gas engine, it needs coolant, oil, all the normal stuff. Turbos are another thing they need. If your lookin to learn a lot about them quick register to www . cumminsforum.com. more info then youll ever need.
:salute
ooo...i know how diesels work......i've worked on a few power strokes, and a few of the non-turbo 7.3's.......i've just never worked on a cummins, nor any diesel in a dodge, so i'm not familiar with how they're controlled.
a non-related funny.......
my neighbor took his stump grinder to a mutual friend of ours about 2 months ago to try to get it running. he partially disassembled it, and then it sat....and sat....and sat.
tom finally got pissed off, and told the guy he was pikcing it up to take it somewhere else. the guy was pissed when he found it was coming to me.
he's talking to me on the phone, ranting and raving about how i know nothing about stump grinders. i go.....excuse me? what kind of engine is on it? he goes a kohler. i go....no...not the brand, what KIND of engine. he answers that it's a v-twin 4 stroke. i go....right...and they all EFFING run the same. i'll have it running before the weeks out.
that was this morning. it's back together and running. :devil
-
Actually the dodge ECUs are more sophisticated than ford and almost equal to GM but suffer from inferior components.
More sophisticated does not necessarily mean better as evidenced by my only having found 2 bad toyota ecus in 31 years of wrenching..........but I did see 15 out of about 1400 sent in having a failure while the rates were much higher in hondas, chrysler, ford, and GM.
Don't get me started on mitsubishi because I fully believe that most in service will suffer a component failure within 6 years of being manufactured though the newer stuff has proven more robust.
Of course, I've replaced tons of ICP sensor circuits and IPR drivers in fords as well as 02 sensor heater circuits on the gas cars but I normally find those parts fine in the chrysler units with chrysler suffering from the 555 timer units and the 5v regulator burning out.
GM? they have problem with the conformal coating swelling and popping surface mount components right off the board as well as the same cold solder joints as ford and chrysler suffer where the connector legs meet the board.
Shake the ecu you can often hear loose components rattling around in the box.
in nearly 30 years, i've replaced more gm puters than chryslers, and more chryslers than fords.....and fords were adaptive when gm still had prom chips.....but we've already been over this.
-
in nearly 30 years, i've replaced more gm puters than chryslers, and more chryslers than fords.....and fords were adaptive when gm still had prom chips.....but we've already been over this.
You reading my mind? :rofl
-
I have an '02 Ram 1500 with the 4.7L. Unless you're pulling an empty trailer, I wouldn't recommend the 4.7L. Runs like a scalded ape empty or with a light/medium load, but not a lot of towing power.
-
in nearly 30 years, i've replaced more gm puters than chryslers, and more chryslers than fords.....and fords were adaptive when gm still had prom chips.....but we've already been over this.
Yes...we were over this and you were not correct.
My 1990 nissan ecu is adaptive and the GM ecus were flash programmed within months of ford ecus being flash programmed with chrysler beating both by 2 years.
Facts are that chrysler and GM ecus are more sophisticated.
Since was the general manager of the facility that rebuilt and tested all ecus sold by standard, bwd, blue streak, and a ton of other names to the tune of many thousands per year, I think I am pretty accurate in my conclusion which is based on my personally sitting in on problem customer ecus as well as being the ecu technician who stood in for the ford guy when he was getting married/honeymoon, sick, vacation...etc
I can accurately say that have personally rebuilt/tested at least 1000 ford ecus as well as solving hundreds of "ECU issues" that were the car's issue since I would routinely send ecus from problem customers to somebody else and they ran fine.
-
Yes...we were over this and you were not correct.
My 1990 nissan ecu is adaptive and the GM ecus were flash programmed within months of ford ecus being flash programmed with chrysler beating both by 2 years.
Facts are that chrysler and GM ecus are more sophisticated.
Since was the general manager of the facility that rebuilt and tested all ecus sold by standard, bwd, blue streak, and a ton of other names to the tune of many thousands per year, I think I am pretty accurate in my conclusion which is based on my personally sitting in on problem customer ecus as well as being the ecu technician who stood in for the ford guy when he was getting married/honeymoon, sick, vacation...etc
I can accurately say that have personally rebuilt/tested at least 1000 ford ecus as well as solving hundreds of "ECU issues" that were the car's issue since I would routinely send ecus from problem customers to somebody else and they ran fine.
well..the conversation was ford vs gm.....and fords were adaptive in the 80's whereas gm wasn't....till the obd2 requirements. fords had better/faster processors, they rarely failed, and they controlled the systems better than gm or chrysler.
chryslers just fail. a lot. or at least they used to.....till the obd2 requirements. i can't tell you how many dodge pickups, jeep grand cherokees, and k-cars i've towed.
grand cherokees were always no-starts, and almost always computers. when not computers, they were ckp's.
the only reason techs don't like ford computers, is that you were unable to get datastream from them till about 92 or so. techs didn't like this, because now they had to think. oh yea....and much like todays obd2 computers will do......fords have almost always triggered lots of codes for one problem. techs didn't like having to think to figure out which code caused the rest of them.
gm's i've had to replace computers, and/or proms. it was a dumb assed system to be honest, but at least it was pretty simple to figure out.
if we go into japanese, i can't recall ever replacing a honda computer. i've done a few toyotas, back in the 90's. and lots of nissans back then. nissans were the worst. i don't recall ever replacing a mazda computer come to think of it.........
and since you(based on your statements) seem to think my word doesn't hold any weight, not a single computer i've replace has ever come back as having been a wrong diagnosis. not one. i'm not a "guesser", and i don't order a part until i'm 110% sure it's needed. this is why i'm trusted by my customers.
people that taught me now ask me for advice, which sometimes i can't help them with, although i try.
what i say, i say from working in the bays 5 or 6 days a week, and from being the guy that everyone gave the poop that they didn't wanna fix to me.
-
Manual trannys do not get better mileage or perform better. In days of old that was correct... but no longer.
My Chevy 2500 HD Crew with Duramax / Allison combo has never been in the shop. Heck... it has 94000 miles or so on it and has never even needed a brake job. It has pulled a 22' and 28" goose loaded on many occassions. It has also pulled the heck out of a 24' Vindicator boat.
I agree with you, automatic transmissions have gotten better across the boards and come a very long way, but a just as modern manual driven (governed) as fuel-conservatively minded as possible will still spank the pants off an automatic, there is just no way an auto being driven in a fuel-conserving manner will ever come close to a manual also being driven in a fuel-conserving manner (gunning it though is of cource another matter). But I admit this is almost an undebatable issue because it (still, as always) heavily depends on the driver, his knowledge and experience, and the direction a breeze carries his fart.
-
I agree with you, automatic transmissions have gotten better across the boards and come a very long way, but a just as modern manual driven (governed) as fuel-conservatively minded as possible will still spank the pants off an automatic, there is just no way an auto being driven in a fuel-conserving manner will ever come close to a manual also being driven in a fuel-conserving manner (gunning it though is of cource another matter). But I admit this is almost an undebatable issue because it (still, as always) heavily depends on the driver, his knowledge and experience, and the direction a breeze carries his fart.
ACTually, modern automatics can and will. they don't slip in final drive, or overdrive anymore, thus they've become very effecient. the only disadvantage to a clutch vehicle now, is the shifting. you always lose something during the shift, whereas the automatics no longer do.
-
Not really, think about pure efficiency and not just MPG.
Just for fun I looked up some stats.
2011 Honda Accord V6
-Weighs: 3559 lbs
-Combined MPG: 24
Do the math, and that's burning 1 gallon of fuel, to move 148 lbs, 24 miles.
Now consider my fathers, '04 Dodge 2500 4 door pickup towing his travel trailer, which is about 15,000lbs GVW and he gets ~ 14mpg towing it.
Do the math and that's burning 1 gallon of fuel, to move 1071 lbs, 14 miles.
Now which more efficient?
Now... .... if your talking about people driving a pickup as a commuter, I agree, that's not very efficient.
EDITED: for math fail.
You could put it that way. But I love the guys who look for trucks with good gas mileage. If you want good gas mileage, get a freakin smart car.
My truck doesn't change when it comes to gas really. Always around 10mpg whether I'm towing or not. 2200rpms is the sweet spot, keep it under it and you're above 10, keep it above it and you're at 7ish.
-
ACTually, modern automatics can and will. they don't slip in final drive, or overdrive anymore, thus they've become very effecient. the only disadvantage to a clutch vehicle now, is the shifting. you always lose something during the shift, whereas the automatics no longer do.
Well, again I agree with the improvement in the technology and that you always loose something everytime you hit the clutch... _if_ you don't want to replace your clutch before the end of the year (and I'm not talking that shiftronic or hybrid trani bull$..). You're gonna always loose some during your typical acceleration, especialy from stop into first. But CAP, as a current or previous manual driver, I'm sure you've been in a situation where you got two gallons left in your tank but 50 miles still left to go until the nearest station, and after pulling out all those tricks in the manual-driver's hat ontop of driving as fuel conservatively on the accelerator as possible, I would be surprised if you ever once didn't make it to the pump.
-
Well, again I agree with the improvement in the technology and that you always loose something everytime you hit the clutch... _if_ you don't want to replace your clutch before the end of the year (and I'm not talking that shiftronic or hybrid trani bull$..). You're gonna always loose some during your typical acceleration, especialy from stop into first. But CAP, as a current or previous manual driver, I'm sure you've been in a situation where you got two gallons left in your tank but 50 miles still left to go until the nearest station, and after pulling out all those tricks in the manual-driver's hat ontop of driving as fuel conservatively on the accelerator as possible, I would be surprised if you ever once didn't make it to the pump.
that's actually one thing that i've only ever done twice...running out of gas that is. both times were faulty fuel gauges. the first time...there was no way in hell i was making it.
the 2nd time was just a few months ago in my jeep./.....gauge was stuck just above half. going up a hill, she sputtered, and quit. thankfully i had enough energy to coast to the top, and the fuelpump got supplied again.
i did everyting i could think of......built up speed, then coasted till i absolutley had to let the clutch out again......made it by the skin of my teeth.
i try to never let my tank below half...when i can.
-
that's actually one thing that i've only ever done twice...running out of gas that is. both times were faulty fuel gauges. the first time...there was no way in hell i was making it.
the 2nd time was just a few months ago in my jeep./.....gauge was stuck just above half. going up a hill, she sputtered, and quit. thankfully i had enough energy to coast to the top, and the fuelpump got supplied again.
i did everyting i could think of......built up speed, then coasted till i absolutley had to let the clutch out again......made it by the skin of my teeth.
i try to never let my tank below half...when i can.
Yeah, I haven't had to milk a tank that bad since graduating myself, and even then in a Honda 2-gallons could get me from anywhere to the nearest pump or even until the next paycheck if I had to. Thankfuly in the Honda I had it liked sucking gas out of the rear passenger corner of it, so it liked going at an economical pace in the slow lane, even while going uphill, lol. With the recent prices of gas I think I'll soon be playing the "how low will the needle go" game again though.
Should of started a new thread, this one is getting hijacked in twelve directions.
Edit: also, I've only "ran out" once ever, back when I was still in school. I live on a hill, drove up, turned around and parked on the other side of the street, facing downhill, one warm Friday afternoon. Come that chilly Sunday morning, forgot to get gas before then, no bueno... so I just poped the clutch and rolled it downhill, and that got the lines enough fuel to get me a couple miles to the station. Ah to be young and dumb again.
-
Yeah, I haven't had to milk a tank that bad since graduating myself, and even then in a Honda 2-gallons could get me from anywhere to the nearest pump or even until the next paycheck if I had to. Thankfuly in the Honda I had it liked sucking gas out of the rear passenger corner of it, so it liked going at an economical pace in the slow lane, even while going uphill, lol. With the recent prices of gas I think I'll soon be playing the "how low will the needle go" game again though.
Should of started a new thread, this one is getting hijacked in twelve directions.
sadly. But its an interesting conversation between you two. very intellectual. :aok
-
The original intent of the thread was played out.
As for running out of fuel.... your system will last much longer if you never let that fuel get low in the first place.
-
Yeah, I haven't had to milk a tank that bad since graduating myself, and even then in a Honda 2-gallons could get me from anywhere to the nearest pump or even until the next paycheck if I had to. Thankfuly in the Honda I had it liked sucking gas out of the rear passenger corner of it, so it liked going at an economical pace in the slow lane, even while going uphill, lol. With the recent prices of gas I think I'll soon be playing the "how low will the needle go" game again though.
Should of started a new thread, this one is getting hijacked in twelve directions.
Edit: also, I've only "ran out" once ever, back when I was still in school. I live on a hill, drove up, turned around and parked on the other side of the street, facing downhill, one warm Friday afternoon. Come that chilly Sunday morning, forgot to get gas before then, no bueno... so I just poped the clutch and rolled it downhill, and that got the lines enough fuel to get me a couple miles to the station. Ah to be young and dumb again.
yea, thread hijacking seems to be the norm here.....but it's not been hijacked in a bad way though.
the conversation is staying basically on motorvehicles, and could prove somewhat useful to the op in a roundabout sort of way. :aok
-
The original intent of the thread was played out.
As for running out of fuel.... your system will last much longer if you never let that fuel get low in the first place.
but do you know why young patawan? :devil
-
It only takes once replacing an in tank fuel pump. Not to mention the possibility of any water in system or the trash.
-
The original intent of the thread was played out.
As for running out of fuel.... your system will last much longer if you never let that fuel get low in the first place.
Understood, a couple of you fine gentlemen were the first to point out to me that a part of the fuel pumps placement is so it can swim in the tank for cooling itself off during operation. Mostly I hated doing it because at the time it was a 15+ year old honda sucking up lord-knows-15-yo deposits floating around in the bottom of that tank, couldn't of been any good.
Luckily though it's head gasket cracked (thuroughly) chugging up the sepulveda pass before anything else major ever failed on it, I loved that '86 civic hatchback and all of it's last 430k miles I put on it, so that was the fork stuck in it, what... 5 or 6 summers ago (technicaly, it was about 1/4-1/2 mile after I already crested the top of the pass and was heading steep downhill and thankfuly at idle with the clutch in, so I was able to roll at a good clip to the shoulder and eventualy off the freeway... manuals FTW!).
-
It only takes once replacing an in tank fuel pump. Not to mention the possibility of any water in system or the trash.
water's fairly uncommon in fuel these days, unless you let it set for a long period of time.
i forget which thread......the one where i posted all the EVAP stuff.......we touched on fuel pumps there too. if they're in the tank, you'll find they're very small. they're in there to keep em cool, and will become exposed to air at about a quarter of a tank.
one thing they've done to try to aleviate that, is to put the pump in a "module" assembly. this keeps the pump submerged somewhat even when the fuel level goes too low.
-
but do you know why young patawan? :devil
Did you really have to beg the question? :D
water's fairly uncommon in fuel these days, unless you let it set for a long period of time.
i forget which thread......the one where i posted all the EVAP stuff.......we touched on fuel pumps there too. if they're in the tank, you'll find they're very small. they're in there to keep em cool, and will become exposed to air at about a quarter of a tank.
one thing they've done to try to aleviate that, is to put the pump in a "module" assembly. this keeps the pump submerged somewhat even when the fuel level goes too low.
I was under the impression, at least in my earleir model Hondas that I played dodge the gas needle with, their fuel pumps and assemblies inside the tank were mounted or "leashed" (had some freedom but generaly stayed within the same area) to one of the rear corners of the tanks, the logic seemed to me that if you're gonna run outa gas it'll be after cresting a hill and while starting to travel down hill or at the very least you wouldn't run out of gas or have a sputter while chugging up it. Not my current mechanic but my previous Honda mechanic (as a mechanic, you know what that means eventualy happened to that relationship) always mentioned to me that because their pumps constantly sucked gas from the bottom of the tank that was a reason to change the fuel filters (his words, "at least") about every other oil change.
-
Did you really have to beg the question? :D
I was under the impression, at least in my earleir model Hondas that I played dodge the gas needle with, their fuel pumps and assemblies inside the tank were mounted or "leashed" (had some freedom but generaly stayed within the same area) to one of the rear corners of the tanks, the logic seemed to me that if you're gonna run outa gas it'll be after cresting a hill and while starting to travel down hill or at the very least you wouldn't run out of gas or have a sputter while chugging up it. Not my current mechanic but my previous Honda mechanic (as a mechanic, you know what that means eventualy happened to that relationship) always mentioned to me that because their pumps constantly sucked gas from the bottom of the tank that was a reason to change the fuel filters (his words, "at least") about every other oil change.
i'd have to go look and see where it's mounted. you mentioned yours was an 86. it could be carbonated, or injected. i think there were something like 3 filters on the carbonated models, while the injected models only had one.
generally on injected models, you'll find the pump somewhere near the center of the tank, and there are generally "bath tubs" surrounding them to prevent fuel sloshing from starving the pump(another FAST way to kill those older pumps)
in tank pumps are generally not able to move either.
almost all fuel pumps have a filter screen on the intake end of them, to help keep the nasty poop out of them.
-
but do you know why young patawan? :devil
everything in the bottom of the tank gets sucked into your fuel filter..and what gets through that goes into your whole fuel system. lettin stuff get in your fuel filter is about as wise as letting your fuel level get that low to begin with, correct?
-
everything in the bottom of the tank gets sucked into your fuel filter..and what gets through that goes into your whole fuel system. lettin stuff get in your fuel filter is about as wise as letting your fuel level get that low to begin with, correct?
not this time......cooling. pumps run hot if out of the liquid.
next time i do a fuel pump, i'll snap a picture of the inside of the tank. believe it or not, there's not as much crap on the bottom of the tank in modern cars as one would think. :aok
-
not this time......cooling. pumps run hot if out of the liquid.
next time i do a fuel pump, i'll snap a picture of the inside of the tank. believe it or not, there's not as much crap on the bottom of the tank in modern cars as one would think. :aok
interesting. hard to believe thayt gas keeps something cool considering its so flammable :headscratch:
-
interesting. hard to believe thayt gas keeps something cool considering its so flammable :headscratch:
oooo....ima gonna make heads explode now. :devil :bhead
did you know that gasoline is not a flammable liquid? :uhoh
-
oooo....ima gonna make heads explode now. :devil :bhead
did you know that gasoline is not a flammable liquid? :uhoh
your right, its the vapors. forgot about that. thew actual liquid ewould put a fire out.
-
your right, its the vapors. forgot about that. thew actual liquid ewould put a fire out.
dam!! you came back too fast!! i wanted to see how many would play "dog pile on da wabbit" over that one. :neener:
-
dam!! you came back too fast!! i wanted to see how many would play "dog pile on da wabbit" over that one. :neener:
haha. found that last year. one of my friends works on a farm..them farm boys know it all it seems :rock
-
haha. found that last year. one of my friends works on a farm..them farm boys know it all it seems :rock
they have to.......truck breaks down, they lose too much time bringing it to the shop....they need to know how to fix it then and there.
did you know diesels were originally made for farmers, and not originally intended to be road going vehicles?
-
I owed an 88 Dodge Dakota once. POS lost its transmission the first 500 miles. Dealer I bought it from replaced it and had the balls to charge me $100 deductable. Last rig I bought there.
-
Good info thx u all for contributing. :salute
I want a 2003_05 only because I love the body style. I had a Silverado 20xx where the vortech ebgine took a crap within the first 1000 miles, they replaced it amd ran great ever since. This thing will run stay as a rock fully loaded with gravel, not like my F250 that feels like driving on sand with same load. The Silverado is awfully bouncy when empty. My f250 diesel still runs great, the electrical is what is falling appart.
-
oooo....ima gonna make heads explode now. :devil :bhead
did you know that gasoline is not a flammable liquid? :uhoh
I have placed a bit of gas in a coffee can (back when they were steel) and half burried it in ground then lit it. This was done to light a wood fire in camp. You half burry the can so it will not tip over. The fuel burns a long controlled burn. If you knock it over it explodes. :D
By mentioning trash and water..... it does not take much at all.
-
they have to.......truck breaks down, they lose too much time bringing it to the shop....they need to know how to fix it then and there. not only that..how many farmers have enough money to bring their stuff to a shop?
did you know diesels were originally made for farmers, and not originally intended to be road going vehicles?makes sense. They're made for work.
-
Good info thx u all for contributing. :salute
I want a 2003_05 only because I love the body style. I had a Silverado 20xx where the vortech ebgine took a crap within the first 1000 miles, they replaced it amd ran great ever since. This thing will run stay as a rock fully loaded with gravel, not like my F250 that feels like driving on sand with same load. The Silverado is awfully bouncy when empty. My f250 diesel still runs great, the electrical is what is falling appart.
Good luck finding one sir :salute
-
i'd have to go look and see where it's mounted. you mentioned yours was an 86. it could be carbonated, or injected. i think there were something like 3 filters on the carbonated models, while the injected models only had one.
generally on injected models, you'll find the pump somewhere near the center of the tank, and there are generally "bath tubs" surrounding them to prevent fuel sloshing from starving the pump(another FAST way to kill those older pumps)
in tank pumps are generally not able to move either.
almost all fuel pumps have a filter screen on the intake end of them, to help keep the nasty poop out of them.
She was injected, albeit if I recall correctly one of the first "fuel injection" systems Honda developed and produced, so just take it for what it was (which was an "interesting" first-gen design).
-
oooo....ima gonna make heads explode now. :devil :bhead
did you know that gasoline is not a flammable liquid? :uhoh
Believe it or not, yes. Have I gotten tired of explaining/arguing with everyone as to why, yes.
Liquid gasoline is not flamable. Fumes (or airated) gasoline on the other hand, is. But I still don't think you'll get places like the State of Californication to understand and let the mechanics start smoking in the bays again.
-
Believe it or not, yes. Have I gotten tired of explaining/arguing with everyone as to why, yes.
Liquid gasoline is not flamable. Fumes (or airated) gasoline on the other hand, is. But I still don't think you'll get places like the State of Californication to understand and let the mechanics start smoking in the bays again.
when i have my part time helper here....he's a smoker....i don't let him smoke in the shop. it's got nothing to do with anything, except that that is one of my rules. i don't like the smell of it, and i'm not gonna have a customer complain about it. :aok
-
when i have my part time helper here....he's a smoker....i don't let him smoke in the shop. it's got nothing to do with anything, except that that is one of my rules. i don't like the smell of it, and i'm not gonna have a customer complain about it. :aok
if i help you, can i dip then and spit in a bottle / trash can :D
-
interesting. hard to believe thayt gas keeps something cool considering its so flammable :headscratch:
Did you know the higher the octane the cooler the engine runs?
-
Something else just hit me abuot some of the dodge 4x4's.
i'm not sure if they still do this or not.......but i've had a few axle replacements on them. front axle, normally the passengers side axle. the front diff ends short of the hub assembly, and there's an axle splined into the diff housing, much like a front wheel drive axle. they tend to strip those splines.
in the 2 years i worked at the last shop before i got my place, i think i did at least 3 of them.
-
Did you know the higher the octane the cooler the engine runs?
interesting. not doubting you, but could CAP verify this?
-
interesting. not doubting you, but could CAP verify this?
i'm honestly not sure on that. i've never checked it, or measured combustion temps....it might be something interesting to check though.
-
i'm honestly not sure on that. i've never checked it, or measured combustion temps....it might be something interesting to check though.
I'm sure your more adequetly tooled to do this then I....hint hint.
-
interesting. not doubting you, but could CAP verify this?
i was just thinking more about this as i was cleaning up.
higher octane has a higher resistance to detonation, and pre-ignition.
detonation is generally when there is excessive heat inside the combustion chamber, which causes pressures to be too high, which ignites the fuel mixture somewhere other than at the spark plug, and often times before the plug fires.
when this happens, you now have 2 flame fronts traveling at each other. when they meet, that's when you get detonation....and it can be pretty dam damaging to an engine.
pre-ignition is generally when a spot in the chamber gets too hot, and ignites the a/f mixture before the plug does. this can/will actually cause detonation(when the flame fronts meet)
with todays computer controls, this isn't very common any more. the worst thing to watch for, is pre-ignition, as using crappy gas, can and will leave carbon deposits in the chamber, and that is where you get hot spots from.
racing engines are totally different.
i need to think more to remember octane ratings meanings......part of it is the resistance to combustion, and detonation.......
EDIT.....
detonation is VERY VERY bad. i've seen drag race engines turn into hand grenades from detonation.
-
i was just thinking more about this as i was cleaning up.
higher octane has a higher resistance to detonation, and pre-ignition.
detonation is generally when there is excessive heat inside the combustion chamber, which causes pressures to be too high, which ignites the fuel mixture somewhere other than at the spark plug, and often times before the plug fires.
when this happens, you now have 2 flame fronts traveling at each other. when they meet, that's when you get detonation....and it can be pretty dam damaging to an engine.
pre-ignition is generally when a spot in the chamber gets too hot, and ignites the a/f mixture before the plug does. this can/will actually cause detonation(when the flame fronts meet)
with todays computer controls, this isn't very common any more. the worst thing to watch for, is pre-ignition, as using crappy gas, can and will leave carbon deposits in the chamber, and that is where you get hot spots from.
racing engines are totally different.
i need to think more to remember octane ratings meanings......part of it is the resistance to combustion, and detonation.......
EDIT.....
detonation is VERY VERY bad. i've seen drag race engines turn into hand grenades from detonation.
scary.
-
scary.
with them, in particular, the top fuelers are making 8,000hp out of just over 500ci. those engines are running right on the edge to begin with. let her go a little lean, and KABLOOEY!!.
cvh could more than likely comment on this too. he's probably one of the smartest racers i've seen post here. well.....'cept he likes chevys, but none of us are perfect. :devil :bolt:
-
with them, in particular, the top fuelers are making 8,000hp out of just over 500ci. those engines are running right on the edge to begin with. let her go a little lean, and KABLOOEY!!.
cvh could more than likely comment on this too. he's probably one of the smartest racers i've seen post here. well.....'cept he likes chevys, but none of us are perfect. :devil :bolt:
in top fuel drag cvars, is it better to have them burn too rich then just right, or could that be just as bad as just a little lean?
-
when i have my part time helper here....he's a smoker....i don't let him smoke in the shop. it's got nothing to do with anything, except that that is one of my rules. i don't like the smell of it, and i'm not gonna have a customer complain about it. :aok
The fact you (or should I say your insurance) let your customers get close enough to the bays to smell them nevermind get a good look at what you're doing to their car inside them would draw some very long stares from the mechanics out here.
-
in top fuel drag cvars, is it better to have them burn too rich then just right, or could that be just as bad as just a little lean?
i'm not as "up" on them as i probably should be....but if i had to take a guess, i'd say too rich is better than too lean.
when you lean out, your combustion temp shoots through the roof. this helps to cause pre-ignition, and/or detonation.
-
The fact you (or should I say your insurance) let your customers get close enough to the bays to smell them nevermind get a good look at what you're doing to their car inside them would draw some very long stares from the mechanics out here.
my shop's set up where they can stand by a window at the first bay. they can see most of what goes on out there.
that, and the smell permeates pretty much everything.
-
my shop's set up where they can stand by a window at the first bay. they can see most of what goes on out there.
that, and the smell permeates pretty much everything.
True.
About the octane discussion, some pondering here on my part, wouldn't a higher resistance to detonating and pre-ignition imply that the ignition point/temperature of the high-octane fuel is higher, thus requiring a hotter ignition source than standard or low octanes would require (now obviously and thanfuly, car designers haven't gotten stupid enough yet to design an ignition system that only generates the bare minimum amount of heat/energy required to ignite nothing higher than say 87 octane)? This hotter ignition source that is required, over say what would be required for the lesser octane fuel grades, wouldn't that qualify as higher-octane engines running hotter as the ignition source is hotter than the colder ignition sources for the lower-octane fuel engines?
-
Wonder why you need lots of spark to ignite a high compression engine? A diesel will auto ignite with 15 octane? ...edit...with no spark?
-
Wonder why you need lots of spark to ignite a high compression engine? A diesel will auto ignite with 15 octane? ...edit...with no spark?
a diesel ignites due to the pressure and temperature. as you compress the a/f mixture, you also heat it up. whereas a gas engine may run 11-1 compression ratio, the diesels may well be in the ballpark of 20-1.
this is also a help for the gasoline engine. as you compress the a/f in a gas engine, it also heats up as it is compressed, but not enough to self ignite.
you need the so much amperage in the spark plugs, because you need to make that spark plug ignite, and have the spark jump a gap that is anywhere from .035 to .080 of an inch. that is a LOT considering the pressures in the combustion chamber,
-
True.
About the octane discussion, some pondering here on my part, wouldn't a higher resistance to detonating and pre-ignition imply that the ignition point/temperature of the high-octane fuel is higher, thus requiring a hotter ignition source than standard or low octanes would require (now obviously and thanfuly, car designers haven't gotten stupid enough yet to design an ignition system that only generates the bare minimum amount of heat/energy required to ignite nothing higher than say 87 octane)? This hotter ignition source that is required, over say what would be required for the lesser octane fuel grades, wouldn't that qualify as higher-octane engines running hotter as the ignition source is hotter than the colder ignition sources for the lower-octane fuel engines?
i would think the same as you're saying. it'll take more spark, and more pressure to burn, generally you'll get a more complete burn, and in theory, these all should increase the combustion temperature.
but here's a couple of other things to consider.
1)compression ratio and compression pressure are different.
2)most modern engines use the egr system to limit the combustion temperature to 2500F or below, in order to control NOX.
-
Why would you need a .080 of an inch of gap on the plugs?
-
Why would you need a .080 of an inch of gap on the plugs?
gm used to use that gap on their HEI ignition systems. most run from .045 to .054, including ford on their eec5 ignition system. some aisian imports still only use .030 to .040.
the theory was the bigger the gap, the more spark exposed to the a/f mixture, creating better combustion.
once again, with todays COP systems being able to individually control each cylinder, it's much easier, and much more effecient. i had talked to a ford factory tech, who explained that when the eec5(i forget what they referred to the ignition system itself as) was installed, it increased power nearly 35%, and mileage nearly 25%. that qualifies as a win/win.