Re: diesel mileage on tow vehicles
[Re: KillerBee]
#207325
01/29/09 05:15 PM
01/29/09 05:15 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134 Kelowna, B.C. Canada
DPelletier
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134
Kelowna, B.C. Canada
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Me personally, I am keeping this early 04 305 555 5.9 as long as I can.
good luck
Funny, you'd say that; As you can see from my sig I have an '03 305/555, and '04.5 325/600, an '06 325/610 and an '08 6.7l and out of all of them, I like the 305/555 the best.
They are ALL good trucks and way better than the brand X's and Y's diesels that I've owned or still own.
The 305/555 is the last of the no-post injection event, no catalytic converter motors. Now keeping in mind that every one of my trucks is slightly different (different drivers, tires, accessories, etc.) so direct and exact comparisons are impossible, but my feeling is that the '03 gets about 1-2 mpg better than the '04 or '06 and 2-3 bettern than the 6.7. I also didn't care for the plastic intercooler tanks they used for awhile on the 325 motors and I feel the NV5600 is a better tranny than the later G56.
I've been running a smarty CaTCHER on the '03 for the last year (c/w gauges, of course) and couldn't be happier. Minor complaints are smoke on the higher settings and you need to watch the EGT gauge when towing heavy.
http://www.madselectronics.com/
Dave
Your reasons are exactly why I specifically bought an early 2004 305/555 HO diesel Ram. Remember, when you list the MPG comparisons of your trucks the 04 you mention is actually an 04.5 model which has the emissions, cat converter, and extra injection event. My early 2004 has no cats, no emission hassles, no post injection event, and better mpg than the 2004.5 and later trucks. Personally I like the looks and feel of the steering wheel in my 2004 better than the 2003 trucks. I have a co-worker with a similar 2005 diesel Ram as mine. My truck ALWAYS gets better mpg than his.
My truck is all stock and has 110k trouble free miles on it. It is my daily driver and I treat it like one of my classic Mopars.(It sure cost as much!) It runs and drives like a brand new vehicle and I love driving it. It still has it's original batteries, transmission, and believe it or not the original ball joints are still in good shape(I do plan to rebuilt the front end this spring just to be safe). I am VERY satisified with it.
With falling prices I have been tempted to buy a newer Diesel Ram truck but after seeing first hand the trouble some are having with carbon build up issues and poor power and MPG with the newer 6.7 diesel Rams I'll just stick with my 04, plus it's paid off. I think the 2003 and early 2004 diesel Ram are the best, most fuel efficient quadcab Ram trucks Dodge ever built. I have done research on the various programmers available but I've resisted the urge to install one as I don't need it to be a race truck, but the thought of even better MPG has my interest. I'm just leary of tearing up a tranny or cooking a turbo. I also intend to drive mine until the wheels fall off.
Nice truck!
A couple comments;
- yes, the 2003 ETH's and 2004 ETH's (HO, 305/555) are identical motors and the trucks are 99.9% the same. I think the steering wheel and headrests are different. I try to refer to my 325/600 as a 2004.5 because of the Jan. 1st, 2004 engine change to meet the new emmissions requiremnets in effect as of that date.
- The programmers are nice, but unnecessary unless you are towing very heavy, in hilly country, and are impatient (unfortunately, I'm guilty on all three counts! ) I assume you have a 48RE and despite any naysaying from the brand X guys, it is a stout tranny. OTOH, it isn't quite as capable of withstanding upgraded power output as the manual trannies. I did have to replace the clutch with a South Bend unit, though.
- In all fairness to Cummins, the 6.7 is still a great engine. There are some issues with the new pollution control garbage, but that isn't really thier fault. The "other" guys motors have more and more crap on them too.
- You've got a great truck there. My advice is to just keep driving it. With an average life to overhaul of 440,000 miles, you aren't gonna wear out that CTD anytime soon!
Cheers, Dave
1970 Super Bee 440 Six Pack
1974 'Cuda
2008 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Ram 3500 Diesel
2004.5 Ram 2500 Diesel
2003 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Durango Limited
[url] http://1970superbee.piczo.com [/url]
|
|
|
Re: diesel mileage on tow vehicles
[Re: DPelletier]
#207326
01/29/09 06:17 PM
01/29/09 06:17 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,498 N.E. Ohio
KillerBee
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,498
N.E. Ohio
|
Nice truck! - You've got a great truck there. My advice is to just keep driving it. With an average life to overhaul of 440,000 miles, you aren't gonna wear out that CTD anytime soon!
Thanks
- In all fairness to Cummins, the 6.7 is still a great engine. There are some issues with the new pollution control garbage, but that isn't really thier fault. The "other" guys motors have more and more crap on them too.
Cheers, Dave
Dave,
I agree with you 100%, the 6.7 engine from Cummins is an EXCELLENT diesel engine that unfortunately has been cut off at the knees by ever increasing emission regulations. My buddy has a 6.7 in his 2007.5. The engine is extremely quiet but is very hard on fuel and feels underpowered. Unfortunately carbon buildup in the turbo from the exhaust and EGR has been a nightmare for him. He's had this carbon buildup issue multiple times, the stealership just cleans everything under warranty and gives the truck back to him to do it all over again, or least until the warranty expires He finally disconnected the EGR system. This brough the truck to life. Tons more power and much better on fuel. Of course now he has a constant check engine light on the dash. Unfortunately like in all states what he had to do is illegal. I hope they can come up with a legal solution to the issues on the 6.7 engine for all those who spent 40k plus on a new diesel Ram. We don't currently have emissions testing in our county but I see it coming in a year or two.
Kevin
|
|
|
Re: diesel mileage on tow vehicles
[Re: KillerBee]
#207327
01/30/09 10:27 AM
01/30/09 10:27 AM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I try and stay away from Fuel Mileage threads at all cost, because half of them are full of crap. Pulling a 40' enclosed, probaly grossing 20-22K, and getting 17 MPG Maybe driving 20 MPH you are getting that. My 03 CTD gets 17 MPG with NO TRAILER, and you are going to tell me you get that hauling around @ 22K LBS? I don't care if there are variables vetween trucks, they ARE NOT going to vary more than 2-3 MPG AT MOST. Hauling my 44' grossing 25K I get 8-10MPG, depending on how fast I go, and what part of the country I am in. Open car hauler loaded, I can squeak 16 if I keep her at 62-65 MPH, it will drop to 15 MPG or so if I speed it up to 70MPH. I have had my truck for 151K miles, and I have tried 3 different programers, and while they all do help SOME, they are not gonna help THAT much I have too many friends that own diesels, and we all hand calculate to see if there is that "unicorn diesel" that can get this so claimed MPG. Well, none so far....the only one's I seem to come across are teh internet Unicorns. Between us we have 2 Duramax's, 2 12 valve CTD, 1 24 Valve, 3 Common Rail 5.9 CTD's, 4 7.3 PSD, and 2 6.0 PSD. The 12 Valve consistently gets the best UNLOADED, and teh Common Rail CTD gets the best LOADED. But none of them vary by more than 2-3 MPG LOADED. We have all pulled the same trailers for teh sake of putting this crap behind us, and pulling the open car hauler (one mentioned above) all teh trucks will get between 14 and 17 MPG. Pulling my 44' enclosed the trucks will get 7-10 MPG. Unless you are using Propane or Hydrogen, you are not getting that kind of mileage (17MPG hauling 20K+ LBS and 25-28 MPG unloaded ) unless you are going off your overhead which is wrong I can tell you that. It is just a PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY to get that kind of fuel economy pulling that much weight. Your truck has to use "X" power to pull "Y" weight and to make "X" power it will require you to use "Z" fuel. So, now you can go ahead and tell me I am crazy and you are right, and you have teh unicorn truck and all. Still does not change physics, and your truck can not pull that much weight and and burn that little of fuel. That is a FACT not an opinion. Let the flame start
|
|
|
Re: diesel mileage on tow vehicles
[Re: dvw]
#207329
01/30/09 10:51 AM
01/30/09 10:51 AM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972 Romeo MI
MR_P_BODY
Master
|
Master
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
|
Quote:
I have a 95 2wd dually w/5 speed stick w/3.55. Pulling a 32ft tri-axle I get 12-13 at 65mph. It has a #10 cam plate & 4" exhaust. I put 285 tires on the rear to lower the engine speed ,it didn't help much. We've had this truck since new. When it was stock pulling a 28ft trailer milage was about the same. Sure would like to see milage like Mr P. Doug
This is the reason I get better mileage(the trailer). I have a 6 sp in mine over the stock 5 sp and the 4" exhaust, I have a #8 plate that I'm going to put in in the spring. Once I'm on the xway my mileage is good, its getting to the xway that it sucks.... city stop and go trafic KILLS my mileage. I put the taller tires on also to help the gear and it helped a little but I still wish I could lower the RPM even more. I tow at 2000rpm and no higher than 2200rpm
|
|
|
Re: diesel mileage on tow vehicles
#207330
01/30/09 02:37 PM
01/30/09 02:37 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134 Kelowna, B.C. Canada
DPelletier
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134
Kelowna, B.C. Canada
|
Quote:
I try and stay away from Fuel Mileage threads at all cost, because half of them are full of crap. Pulling a 40' enclosed, probaly grossing 20-22K, and getting 17 MPG Maybe driving 20 MPH you are getting that. My 03 CTD gets 17 MPG with NO TRAILER, and you are going to tell me you get that hauling around @ 22K LBS? I don't care if there are variables vetween trucks, they ARE NOT going to vary more than 2-3 MPG AT MOST. Hauling my 44' grossing 25K I get 8-10MPG, depending on how fast I go, and what part of the country I am in. Open car hauler loaded, I can squeak 16 if I keep her at 62-65 MPH, it will drop to 15 MPG or so if I speed it up to 70MPH. I have had my truck for 151K miles, and I have tried 3 different programers, and while they all do help SOME, they are not gonna help THAT much I have too many friends that own diesels, and we all hand calculate to see if there is that "unicorn diesel" that can get this so claimed MPG. Well, none so far....the only one's I seem to come across are teh internet Unicorns. Between us we have 2 Duramax's, 2 12 valve CTD, 1 24 Valve, 3 Common Rail 5.9 CTD's, 4 7.3 PSD, and 2 6.0 PSD. The 12 Valve consistently gets the best UNLOADED, and teh Common Rail CTD gets the best LOADED. But none of them vary by more than 2-3 MPG LOADED. We have all pulled the same trailers for teh sake of putting this crap behind us, and pulling the open car hauler (one mentioned above) all teh trucks will get between 14 and 17 MPG. Pulling my 44' enclosed the trucks will get 7-10 MPG.
Unless you are using Propane or Hydrogen, you are not getting that kind of mileage (17MPG hauling 20K+ LBS and 25-28 MPG unloaded ) unless you are going off your overhead which is wrong I can tell you that. It is just a PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY to get that kind of fuel economy pulling that much weight. Your truck has to use "X" power to pull "Y" weight and to make "X" power it will require you to use "Z" fuel.
So, now you can go ahead and tell me I am crazy and you are right, and you have teh unicorn truck and all. Still does not change physics, and your truck can not pull that much weight and and burn that little of fuel. That is a FACT not an opinion. Let the flame start
Well stated. Mileage claims are bogus at least half the time and there is NO free lunch! The 12V's get great mileage empty, but don't have enough power (stock) loaded and so mileage suffers.
RPM and speed (not the same thing as wind resistance plays a BIG part with most enclosed trailers) can make a big difference as well.
Some fueling boxes, chips and mods can also help with output and mileage to a lesser extent, but come at a cost of increased emissions (no free ride, right!)
When it comes to diesels, people concerned with economy would be better off buying based on power requirements; if 160hp/400ft lbs is enough, then an early 12V will give you better mileage than a new 6.7 CTD. Unfortunately most purchasers want the mileage of a 1993 with the power of a 2008!
Cheers, Dave
1970 Super Bee 440 Six Pack
1974 'Cuda
2008 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Ram 3500 Diesel
2004.5 Ram 2500 Diesel
2003 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Durango Limited
[url] http://1970superbee.piczo.com [/url]
|
|
|
Re: diesel mileage on tow vehicles
[Re: RobX4406]
#207332
01/30/09 03:55 PM
01/30/09 03:55 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134 Kelowna, B.C. Canada
DPelletier
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 15,134
Kelowna, B.C. Canada
|
Yeah, the speed makes a big difference. The enclosed trailers are really bad at speed unless you've got a v-nose or bubble to break the wind (you know what I mean! ) It's like towing a billboard down the highway. Dave
1970 Super Bee 440 Six Pack
1974 'Cuda
2008 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Ram 3500 Diesel
2004.5 Ram 2500 Diesel
2003 Ram 3500 Diesel
2006 Durango Limited
[url] http://1970superbee.piczo.com [/url]
|
|
|
Re: diesel mileage on tow vehicles
#207334
01/30/09 04:58 PM
01/30/09 04:58 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972 Romeo MI
MR_P_BODY
Master
|
Master
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
|
Quote:
I try and stay away from Fuel Mileage threads at all cost, because half of them are full of crap. Pulling a 40' enclosed, probaly grossing 20-22K, and getting 17 MPG Maybe driving 20 MPH you are getting that. My 03 CTD gets 17 MPG with NO TRAILER, and you are going to tell me you get that hauling around @ 22K LBS? I don't care if there are variables vetween trucks, they ARE NOT going to vary more than 2-3 MPG AT MOST. Hauling my 44' grossing 25K I get 8-10MPG, depending on how fast I go, and what part of the country I am in. Open car hauler loaded, I can squeak 16 if I keep her at 62-65 MPH, it will drop to 15 MPG or so if I speed it up to 70MPH. I have had my truck for 151K miles, and I have tried 3 different programers, and while they all do help SOME, they are not gonna help THAT much I have too many friends that own diesels, and we all hand calculate to see if there is that "unicorn diesel" that can get this so claimed MPG. Well, none so far....the only one's I seem to come across are teh internet Unicorns. Between us we have 2 Duramax's, 2 12 valve CTD, 1 24 Valve, 3 Common Rail 5.9 CTD's, 4 7.3 PSD, and 2 6.0 PSD. The 12 Valve consistently gets the best UNLOADED, and teh Common Rail CTD gets the best LOADED. But none of them vary by more than 2-3 MPG LOADED. We have all pulled the same trailers for teh sake of putting this crap behind us, and pulling the open car hauler (one mentioned above) all teh trucks will get between 14 and 17 MPG. Pulling my 44' enclosed the trucks will get 7-10 MPG.
Unless you are using Propane or Hydrogen, you are not getting that kind of mileage (17MPG hauling 20K+ LBS and 25-28 MPG unloaded ) unless you are going off your overhead which is wrong I can tell you that. It is just a PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY to get that kind of fuel economy pulling that much weight. Your truck has to use "X" power to pull "Y" weight and to make "X" power it will require you to use "Z" fuel.
So, now you can go ahead and tell me I am crazy and you are right, and you have teh unicorn truck and all. Still does not change physics, and your truck can not pull that much weight and and burn that little of fuel. That is a FACT not an opinion. Let the flame start
By the way I dont have the overhead readout, I have to calculate it, if you dont believe my numbers... to bad... I'm not BS you
|
|
|
|
|