Wild Card
North Carolina
Senior Member
Joined: 10/13/2016
View Profile
 Offline
|
blofgren wrote:ShinerBock wrote:blofgren wrote:
Wouldn't an indication of this be noticeably less fuel economy than the other trucks? Also I would think if that new of a truck was in regen that soon there must have been something wrong with it.
No, defueling a diesel does not give you less fuel economy. It will give you less power from the engine. Well, technically you will use more fuel because it takes you longer to get up a hill versus having full power, but seeing that all of these trucks were about the same time, it wouldn't have been noticeable in this test.
Most modern diesels are programmed to defuel if certain parameters are over their limits like EGTs or boost pressure. Another form of defueling is torque management where you do not get full engine power in the first few gears because the ECM programs it to inject less fuel until you get into the higher gears.
Gotcha. The few (and very few) times my truck has gone into regen the only way I've known is that the fuel economy drops and after parking it I've noticed it has a very "hot" smell from the exhaust. I've noticed no difference in power, but it only regens when I'm not pulling so that is not surprising. It never regens when towing presumably because the exhaust is hot enough to burn off particulate naturally.
Don't know what you are driving or how many miles on it...but Most regen every 1k miles needed or not.
2015 Ram 3500 Dually
Sundowner 2286GM Pro-Grade Toyhauler
|
ramincr
campbell river b.c.
New Member
Joined: 03/04/2017
View Profile
Offline
|
They tested the Ford twice and gave it the best results
|
spoon059
Just north of D.C.
Senior Member
Joined: 10/03/2010
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
Offline
|
mtofell1 wrote:3 GREAT truck all within a hair of each other + 1 specific test on 1 day = 5 Years of pointless internet forum bragging and boasting.
Anyone who concludes anything other than these are 3 great trucks on very equal footing needs to stop looking through the prism of their favorite brand.
THIS!
2015 Ram CTD
2015 Jayco 29QBS
|
brulaz
Ontario Canada
Senior Member
Joined: 02/27/2013
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
Offline
|
A test on a different slope that puts the trannys in different gears could completely change the order results, especially as they are already extremely close. Although one of the worst, this is just one hill.
The downhill braking results are more interesting to me than the uphill. Although I would like to see a slower, windier descent with many 20mph hair-pin curves.
2014 ORV Timber Ridge 240RKS,8500#,1250# tongue,44K miles
690W Rooftop + 340W Portable Solar,4 GC2s,215Ah@24V
2016 Ram 2500 4x4 RgCab CTD,2507# payload,10.8 mpgUS tow
|
ramincr
campbell river b.c.
New Member
Joined: 03/04/2017
View Profile
Offline
|
Andre Smirnov
March 4, 2017 at 11:43 am
We did not detect any mechanical or software fault with the Super Duty. We did run the truck twice with similar results. We reported the best numbers
|
|
|
larry barnhart
wenatchee. wa usa
Senior Member
Joined: 03/30/2001
View Profile
Offline
|
From what I see the 6.6 is smaller than a 6.7. No bragg just a fact. Kidding of course.
chevman
chevman
2019 rockwood 34 ft fifth wheel sold
2005 3500 2wd duramax CC dually
prodigy
KSH 55 inbed fuel tank
scanguage II
TD-EOC
Induction Overhaul Kit
TST tire monitors
FMCA # F479110
|
Cummins12V98
on the road
Senior Member
Joined: 06/03/2012
View Profile
Offline
|
Huntindog wrote:patriotgrunt wrote:Lessmore wrote:Chevies have always been known for outstanding power...all starting back in 1955 with the introduction of the legendary small block Chevy V8. Power and lots of it...has been a bow tie tradition in both gas and diesel engines over the years.
So no....not at all...nope.... I'm not surprised that Chevy came first and Ford was at the tail end.
Some say horse power is horsepower....but in my humble opinion horses are rated differently....there are Shetland horses (blue oval) and then there are Clydesdale's (bow tie). ![[emoticon]](http://www.coastresorts.com/sharedcontent/cfb/images/biggrin.gif "biggrin")
All I can say...is it is a good thing that the Chevy was 'hobbled' with 3.73's to the Ford's 4.10's....or could you imagine what the Chevy times would of been.
Remind my again why these trucks are only pulling 22,800#s? That 30K spec is not a realistic number for Rvers.
A 30K 5ver will have approx. 7500# pin weight.
None of the trucks are capable of that.
Lots of guys hauling big car trailers. So the upper numbers do apply just not to the masses. If they could pass the SAE test with 30K in tow they sure would have!
Heck my RV is borderline with the GM's.
![[image]](http://i.imgur.com/CMGr3oQl.jpg)
2015 RAM LongHorn 3500 Dually CrewCab 4X4 CUMMINS/AISIN RearAir 385HP/865TQ 4:10's
37,800# GCVWR "Towing Beast"
"HeavyWeight" B&W RVK3600
2016 MobileSuites 39TKSB3 highly "Elited" In the stable
2007.5 Mobile Suites 36 SB3 29,000# Combined SOLD
|
Cummins12V98
on the road
Senior Member
Joined: 06/03/2012
View Profile
Offline
|
4x4ord wrote:CumminsDriver wrote:I haven't seen this mentioned yet, but since the Chevy and Ford are very close power wise, and the results reflect that, maybe the Ram was just a very good performing truck which really surprised everyone?
Rich
If all three trucks were putting out their claimed power the Chev would come in about 30 seconds ahead of the Ford but the Ram would have been 2 and a half minutes behind the Ford. The new Duramax is claimed to have 150 lbft of torque and 48 more HP than the previous Duramax, yet it seems to be very comparable to the outgoing model. So it seams to me that both the Ford and GM were not performing anywhere close to where they should have.
Just based on Dyno results on my 11 HO Dually and BD's 12 Ford my RAM has MUCH higher power to the rear wheels based on advertised HP.
|
Rich1961
Spring Creek Nevada
Senior Member
Joined: 09/09/2006
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
Offline
|
4x4ord wrote:CumminsDriver wrote:I haven't seen this mentioned yet, but since the Chevy and Ford are very close power wise, and the results reflect that, maybe the Ram was just a very good performing truck which really surprised everyone?
Rich
If all three trucks were putting out their claimed power the Chev would come in about 30 seconds ahead of the Ford but the Ram would have been 2 and a half minutes behind the Ford. The new Duramax is claimed to have 150 lbft of torque and 48 more HP than the previous Duramax, yet it seems to be very comparable to the outgoing model. So it seams to me that both the Ford and GM were not performing anywhere close to where they should have.
Honestly with the Ford having 4.10's and a deeper geared transmission in the first 4 gears, I thought it would walk away from the other two, even with 5 less horsepower than the Chevy. It certainly showed better 0 - 60 times and the gearing was the reason why.
As for the new Duramax, I've seen videos of the it going up against the outgoing LML Duramax and it beats the older engine but not by as much as I thought it would.
The Ram/Cummins is just a solid great performer all around that gets the job done year after year. Regardless of what some think, they are great trucks like the other two. I've owned them, and would have one right now except the other half liked the GM seats better ![[emoticon]](http://www.coastresorts.com/sharedcontent/cfb/images/smile.gif "smile") .
Rich
2016 Chevrolet/Duramax 3500HD Dually Crew Cab B&W RVK 3700 5th Wheel Hitch
2014 Arctic Fox 29-5T
|
Rich1961
Spring Creek Nevada
Senior Member
Joined: 09/09/2006
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
Offline
|
Cummins12V98 wrote:Huntindog wrote:patriotgrunt wrote:Lessmore wrote:Chevies have always been known for outstanding power...all starting back in 1955 with the introduction of the legendary small block Chevy V8. Power and lots of it...has been a bow tie tradition in both gas and diesel engines over the years.
So no....not at all...nope.... I'm not surprised that Chevy came first and Ford was at the tail end.
Some say horse power is horsepower....but in my humble opinion horses are rated differently....there are Shetland horses (blue oval) and then there are Clydesdale's (bow tie).
All I can say...is it is a good thing that the Chevy was 'hobbled' with 3.73's to the Ford's 4.10's....or could you imagine what the Chevy times would of been.
Remind my again why these trucks are only pulling 22,800#s? That 30K spec is not a realistic number for Rvers.
A 30K 5ver will have approx. 7500# pin weight.
None of the trucks are capable of that.
Lots of guys hauling big car trailers. So the upper numbers do apply just not to the masses. If they could pass the SAE test with 30K in tow they sure would have!
Heck my RV is borderline with the GM's.
Lot's of guys hauling the big car hauler trailers with all three brands, but I do see a big advantage in numbers to the Ram. I travel about once a month to the San Francisco Bay area, and go by the Benicia Bridge where there is a huge area where the ships and Railroad off load cars and trucks. The Duallys hauling these trailers have 45K weight stickers on the doors so they don't go by what the trucks factory GCWR is, they go by what they can legally haul and how much they want to register the trucks for. All three brands do it with much heavier loads than your 5th wheel.
Rich
|
|
|
