TowRig.com - Diesel Discussion and Tow Tech

Ok guys, I know I may be starting a war here, but I feel like arguing a little bit. I like the GM better than Ford and Dodge. While I think the cummins has the most potential, I think the Dmax pulls better than cummins and the ford 6.0, ecspecially stock. I think the Allison is by far the best auto you can get, I think dodges autos are a joke. Gm is by far the most comfortable ride, most comfortable interior, and just looks good. I like how fords superdutys are big and roomy, but I hate thier interior. Dodges I think are the least comfortable, have a terrible 4 door, both the tiny back seat and now the over done MEGA CAB!!! I really belive if it wasnt for cummins, dodge would be 6 feet under. Ive driven all 3, had a Cummins, and prefer the GM with the Dmax/Alli combo. I think its the best all around. But, its all just an opinion, even though Im right!!!!!!!rotfl


Lets see where this goes!!! :popcorn:

No takers? I suppose that's cause Ford and Dodge haven't gotten their noses off the floor from bowing to GMrotfl

Actually Dodge is the best for one reason, because I own one. rotfl

I'm begining to agree with you. I have a V10 Dodge and love it, but now I need a real back seat. The cummins is great, but their auto's suck. After buying our Yukon XL and driving my friends GMC I'm sold on what my next truck will be, at least if bought today. Tomorrow everything might all change. Unfortunatly I'm probably looking at 08s, not 06s, although I need the back seat today for the kids. what to do :(

No takers? I suppose that's cause Ford and Dodge haven't gotten their noses off the floor from bowing to GMrotfl Nah, it's because the Ford and Dodge guys aren't interested in arguing with GM guys, just between the two, because Dodge and Ford are the two that are always in battle for whats considered the best diesel pickup....GM wasn't even on the map with the girly IFS, cute push button transfer cases, and a "diesel" engine that sounds like a gas truck, YUCK.:stir:

Your right that there is no argument. The Dmax has the most stock power, no argument there. True, they may sound like a realy fast gasser. But, its better than sounding like a high powered sewing machine like the new cummins.

:stir:

I always said I would never own a IFS POS. My buddy bought a 1999 K3500 Chevy 5 years ago. Over the past 5 years our families have gone on different trips and I've gotten to ride in it more and more. We'd take the 4 wheelers out and most of the time he would drive because he has a car trailer also, so it would fit all the quads. My solid front axle ride started getting real old. Granted it was lifted 6 inches, so that didn't help. But even stock solid front axle trucks didn't ride as nice. I have family members with Fords and Dodges, and for me the Chevy/GMC seats are more comfortable, and the ride is no comparison. If I was going to wheel the crap out of it, I wouldn't have bought the truck I did. But for comfort and travel I love it.

Your right that there is no argument. The Dmax has the most stock power, no argument there. True, they may sound like a realy fast gasser. But, its better than sounding like a high powered sewing machine like the new cummins.

:stir:
1. Who basically cares who is making the most power currently, it will just likely change next year and if it doesn't it will definantly the year after. Ford is about due to be #1 again. The big three just have a big computer war going on...."who is going to have the most aggressive ECM this year...." I pay more attention to transmission options because I'm more interested to see if the current trans is capable of the power a black pox would push it anyway.

If I was buying a new truck, stock power would mean little to me, sence I'd be adding some sort of large black box, exhaust, intake, and other mods anyway.

2. I agree that the new Cummins sounds like crap, almost as bad as the Ford PSD and Dmax.

Diesel pickups quit sounding good standing next to them with the truck idling in....

A. 2003 for Dodge, this was the first year of the CR motors with the quiet idle crap.

B. Late 2003 Ford 7.3's that started recieving same multi injection quiet idle crap.

C. All Dmax's. None have sounded good, but if I had to choose it would be the LB7, it was the loudest.

Yet another reason I love my '01.5 Ram, when I roll up to a stop light in traffic, anyone with their window down is going to hear nothing but CUMMINS. :pimp:

Dont get me wrong, I love the loudness. I believe that is how a true diesel should sound. But, it is nice haveing the option of a quiter diesel. When im hunting, nothing is worse than scaring off deer from 10 miles away.

Ahh!!! The true symbols of power!

Ahh!!! The true symbols of power!pfffhhh...how cute.rotfl


Cough*...a real motor..cough*...with a turbo you can actually find under the hood...cough* cough*...
http://towrig.com/photos/data/510/48my_cummins_engine.jpg

All I can say is that my STOCK 6.5 will dust my buddies STOCK 01 Cummins in a drag race. And we both can hold the same speed towing the same boat up the same hill. So where is the advantage???
Oh and my trans is still fine while his is starting to slip:doah: rotfl

I really do think the cummins is slight better than the dmax. Longevity and fuel mileage, it probably wins. From my experience, the dmax tows a little better I think. Besides the cummins and duramax battle, I think GM beats dodge in every aspect still. Tranny, comfort, design, interior, looks.....The only thing I really like about the dodge is the cummins, I really dont like the rest of the truck. Its all prefrence though. People like what their gonna like. waytogo

cough..cough..real transmission..cough..cough!:stir:
cough..only in GM..cough..cough

:stir: LOL!!!!! rotfl

Ok guys, I know I may be starting a war here, but I feel like arguing a little bit. I like the GM better than Ford and Dodge. While I think the cummins has the most potential, I think the Dmax pulls better than cummins and the ford 6.0, ecspecially stock. I think the Allison is by far the best auto you can get, I think dodges autos are a joke. Gm is by far the most comfortable ride, most comfortable interior, and just looks good. I like how fords superdutys are big and roomy, but I hate thier interior. Dodges I think are the least comfortable, have a terrible 4 door, both the tiny back seat and now the over done MEGA CAB!!! I really belive if it wasnt for cummins, dodge would be 6 feet under. Ive driven all 3, had a Cummins, and prefer the GM with the Dmax/Alli combo. I think its the best all around. But, its all just an opinion, even though Im right!!!!!!!rotfl


Lets see where this goes!!! :popcorn:

Okay... I'll bite. When I bought my F350 Crew Cab long bed back in mid 2003, I test drove both the GM HD and F350 back to back three times. They are both good trucks. I chose the F350 for several reasons including the size of the interior (when going to a race my girls fill up the back seat with stuff and the Ford has more room back there) and I felt (as did several other magazines of the time) that the 6.0L was the quietest diesel on the market.

Also, based on several truck magazine articles I've read, while the Dodge and the GM may have more outright power, put a trailer behind them, and the Ford has won every test I've seen. Since I bought mine for towing my Vette around, that held quite a bit of weight with me.

In terms of looks, to each his own. I think the F350 looks much better than both the GMC and the Dodge.

I've now got 50k miles on my F350 and still love it... and I'm partial to GM (by other cars are a 2002 Corvette Z06 and a 2003 Chevy Trailblazer).

I'm not a big fan of IFS. My last truck was a 92 K2500 with a 350, 4wd, and unfortunately IFS. Too costly to modify and/or lift, and even when it is, the center chunk still hangs down quite a bit. Granted that's not such a problem when dealing with a tow rig. Simplicity is nice, and SFA tends to be a bit less complex and in some cases fragile than IFS with all it's somewhat delicate CV's, and so forth.

I really don't see the ride of my 2005 3500 Ram being much if any worse than that older K2500.

Do the new GM trucks even come with a manual transmission option for those of us who don't care for automatics regardless what brand they are? That's yet another place Dodge won out for me, besides the Cummins and the interior.

I prefer the Dodge Ram interior to the GM trucks, I mean who needs all that extra junk? I can turn my headlights on just fine myself thanks. The GM truck has a pretty fancy interior but doesn't really have much more function than the Dodge does.

IMO the Avalanche style front end looks goofy. No offense to anybody who likes it, but it just hasn't managed to grow on me, despite a family member choosing to own an Avalanche.

The other thing is look under the hood of all 3 makers and determine how difficult it'd be to get in there and work on it if you had to. For me I prefer what it looks like under the hood of a Cummins powered Dodge, everything one needs to see or access is clearly visible and reasonably accessable.

As for power, as mentioned previously, it all depends on who happens to have the more aggressive ECM programming at the time. There's always addons if one doesn't think a truck is powerful enough. Normally it doesn't matter to me who can get somewhere the fastest. What does matter to me is longevity, so I choose the system that gets me the most bearing surface area, which should help in that department a bit.

I dont really care wether its afs or a straight axle. If i wanna climb a cliff, ill use a jeep or a quad. The ride difference between a dodge 2500 4x4 and a gm 2500 4x4 is quit great. We have a 2003 dodge that is rough as hell off road. Feels like a damn tank. My 2002 gm rides so much smoother off road, no comparison. I just think the dodge interior kinda looks like a mini van inside, just not for me. True, I dont think GM offers a manual. Got me beat there. I agree with you on the avalanche look, not for me either. Why I have a GMC. The only advantage to having all that space under the hood is if you know how to work on these newer engines. My old 12 valve was easy to work on, but I cant do any work on the newer engines. If you can great.waytogo Just to many computers and electic parts for me to know what Im doing.

Well all I can say is when your truck is 15 years old and still running, let alone never had a wrench inside the engine and still pulling your Fifthwheel anywhere you want to go, getting 21 mpg empty, putting out 300+ HP and did I mention your aluminum/plastic junk still running, then we will compare trucks. That's all I have to say about that!:stir:

There are pletny of old GM diesels running around too. Along with GM gassers. My uncle has 260,000 hard miles on his 5.7 2500 and it Still going 17 years later!
I could care less about a manual transmission. I like manuals, coolness of them can't be beat, but an auto is so much easier for a long trip. IF GM doesn't offer a stick with the Duramax, its because the new 6 speed Allison can be shifted manually if you want to. All of the Engines in my fire department have this type of Allsion and they are unbeatable for this the type of driving that we do. Just my opinion. The Duramax is not weak, IFS is not girly (Its actually very strong, the weak stereotype comes from people who mess with theirs and I agree, a solid axle would be very cool in a GM, but how many of us can truly say you absolutely NEED a SFA for our truck?), and the Allison is the strongest light duty truck transmission around. Like I said just my opinion.

My 2002 gm rides so much smoother off road, no comparison. Take great caution with your GM offroad, you might break something. The GM designers didn't design them for offroad use because they figure their yuppie customer base won't ever hit dirt but maybe a gravel driveway.:popcorn: :D Oh yeah...thats a burn...rotfl

To all you GM guys that think that the only reason anyone buys a Dodge is because of the Cummins.... For some, I'd agree, there are a lot of guys that buy them for the motor.:)

I originally did too!.....BUT, after owning a Dodge I relized how nice they really are.

If there was no such thing as a diesel option in a pickup I would still be looking for a 2001-'02 Ram 2500, but with the monster V10.

Better seats, better leather, IMHO a better dash layout, better suspension (personal opinion) and a MUCH better looking body style. I love my mono chrome Sport Ram.waytogo
But it doesn't really matter what I think, we all have our opinions.....a truck is only "best" for each person, Not as a whole. I like the way I sit up and feel I can see way over my hood, some folks like the more "cockpit" feeling of the GM's....it's all personal preference.waytogo

Im not sure who your callin' yuppie, I know your not talking about this farmboy. The only yuppies riding around in my truck are the ones stuck in my front grill. And to be quit honest, the dodge trucks just dont hold up to the hard work we put em through. If your easy on em they will, but put em through hard work and they fall apart. Windows, door locks, handles come apart. Engine will last through any hell you put it through, but the doggy dodge falls apart. I probably have more dirt on my dash than your truck has ever seen:stir:

I don't know what yuppies you are taliking about either. Friend bought a 1996 K1500 put 6 six inch lift and 36 inch tires. We mudded and even JUMPED IT, YEAH I SAID JUMPED IT, a few times. Went up to his cabin quite a bit in the winter. I was jumping a 1985 Suburban 1/2 ton a dozen times. Highest I ever jumped it was about 6 feet in the air. My buddy sold his truck with a little over a 100K on it.

While I was running a wrecker service I towed many a Chevy after the front axel shafts that are the same as a FWD full size car,snapped in two and left them sitting in the mud.

Im not sure who your callin' yuppie, I know your not talking about this farmboy.
Cool, another farmer.waytogo I love stirring up the GM guys with the yuppie remark.:D My actuall definition of a yup is one that does a 9-5 monday through Friday and drive a diesel pickup for no reason. No trailer, nothing to trailer, nothing to haul...just want to drive in around in a "big" truck. It seems that the GM rides are severly prefered by these people. You are a farmer, you probably get it.;)
And to be quit honest, the dodge trucks just dont hold up to the hard work we put em through. If your easy on em they will, but put em through hard work and they fall apart. Windows, door locks, handles come apart. Engine will last through any hell you put it through, but the doggy dodge falls apart.

Well, I'd definantly disagree. In my neighborhood (not 5 houses per acre, a neighborhood of 20 square miles of ranches and farmers) you will find many trucks from all three that work just great everyday. I've never really seen a truck that has stuck out as "tougher than the rest."

I probably have more dirt on my dash than your truck has ever seen:stir:
You're probably right, my Dodge is too purdy and nice to use out in the field, I use our beater Chevies and one Ford for the dirty work. They are despensible.....:popcorn:

I don't know what yuppies you are taliking about either. Friend bought a 1996 K1500 put 6 six inch lift and 36 inch tires. We mudded and even JUMPED IT, YEAH I SAID JUMPED IT, a few times. Went up to his cabin quite a bit in the winter. I was jumping a 1985 Suburban 1/2 ton a dozen times. Highest I ever jumped it was about 6 feet in the air. My buddy sold his truck with a little over a 100K on it.


rotfl so....

Glad to be talking to another farmer also:D . I personally dont care if a person drives a diesel pickup and never uses it, just as long as they dont start talking smack about how bad their truck is. If your using for work or pulling boats or travel trailors or whatever, then you have the right to brag!!!! I live in the very dirty and dusty part of Arizona. Growing mainly cotton and alfalfa, our field roads get really bad. ecspecially since we havent had rain in a record breaking 120+ days now.:mad: Generally out here though, there a fewer dodges on the farms. I really dont know why. I think its because its a pain in the butt to irrigate and check fields with a manual, and the dodges are just known to have the weaker auto. Not sure if thats the reason, just my prefrence. I really like all 3 brands, just like stirring things up with the dodge guys.waytogo

No yuppies here in West Virginia either! Just us Good Old Boys!

Git R Done!!!!!!!!

Git R Done!!!!!!!!
Nuthin wrong with that!:D Cool avatar by the way!waytogo

While I was running a wrecker service I towed many a Chevy after the front axel shafts that are the same as a FWD full size car,snapped in two and left them sitting in the mud.
Yeah, those shafts are so fragile... that lots of guys are running sub 13 second quarter miles with 4wd launches with 33" tires on stock shafts and CVs. :rolleyes: Kinda like those "weak" aluminum heads eh?

The only ones that I've seen breaking are the ones that are lifted and exceeding the angular limits of the CVs.

And as for the comment about being the same as FWD cars, give me a break...

The only ones that I've seen breaking are the ones that are lifted and exceeding the angular limits of the CVs.
I'm glad someone else knows this. That is exactly what I was talking about!waytogo

Take great caution with your GM offroad, you might break something. The GM designers didn't design them for offroad use because they figure their yuppie customer base won't ever hit dirt but maybe a gravel driveway.:popcorn: :D Oh yeah...thats a burn...rotfl


Did you miss what you said a few posts earlier. Not saying IFS is the best set-up, just saying we've wheeled them with no issues.

Yeah, those shafts are so fragile... that lots of guys are running sub 13 second quarter miles with 4wd launches with 33" tires on stock shafts and CVs. :rolleyes: Kinda like those "weak" aluminum heads eh?

The only ones that I've seen breaking are the ones that are lifted and exceeding the angular limits of the CVs.

And as for the comment about being the same as FWD cars, give me a break...

The HD's are obviously stouter but I have seen a number of broken front ends on 1/2tons. I had a buddy in high school that had a '99 1/2t with a 6" Fabtech lift and 33x15.50 TSL SX's. He did not have the bars cranked, and the lift is supposed to retain factory angles. He broke those front CV's a couple of times. I remember a couple of other guys having problems with the 1/2t's. Some had the bars cranked, and some didn't.

I've never seen any problems with the HD setup.

Did you miss what you said a few posts earlier. Not saying IFS is the best set-up, just saying we've wheeled them with no issues.

I know exactly what I said, I wrote it.

so you wheeled the thing...big deal.:)

The HD's are obviously stouter but I have seen a number of broken front ends on 1/2tons. I had a buddy in high school that had a '99 1/2t with a 6" Fabtech lift and 33x15.50 TSL SX's. He did not have the bars cranked, and the lift is supposed to retain factory angles. He broke those front CV's a couple of times. I remember a couple of other guys having problems with the 1/2t's. Some had the bars cranked, and some didn't.

I've never seen any problems with the HD setup.
I personally know of 700r4s that failed (including mine). And 47/48REs. Does that make them inherently bad? Do they deserve the bad rap they get? I seem to recall you saying they don't. How is that different?

Heck, I even know of a NV4500 that failed multiple times behind a stock (relatively) lightly used CTD. I also know of Allisons, C6s and th400s that failed in vehicles (including cars!) that were basically stock and not used hard. Are they crap too?

I know your answers on that Bobby, just trying to make a point. I fully agree that the half tons are weaker and more failure prone, no doubt about it in my mind. And I don't know of a single HD IFS failure that was not lifted and running over sized tires; and that includes 500rwhp+ 4WD drag strip launches with 7500 lbs on 33s.

And we’ve had the discussion about expenses and maintenance before. As I recall, the general consensus was that between the modern weak knuckled, unit bearing, CAD, electronic breed of Dana 60s (and hybrids like the silly D50) and the HD IFS, there is not enough difference to make one any better than the other.

And speaking of clearance, IFS has MORE clearance in the center due to the elevated diff. SFA is somewhat better near the tires (though many give that up even on SFA with hanging control arms and such), but the center is the more important.

I just get really tired of all the misinformed FUD about IFS that gets spewed on the internet…

To restate what I’ve said many times, IFS is *FINE* and even *BETTER* than SFA in a *REAL* tow rig. *REAL* towrigs spend most of their time on the street with some time hauling a load. Lifting and adding big tires hurts those duties considerably, so if it IS a *tow rig*, why do it? Only reason I can see is posers and/or compensating for other, shall we say, deficiencies? ;) :stir: So for *real* towrig duties, IFS gives you the “ride” and handling of a 2WD (which BTW is IFS just so we are clear) with the ability to engage 4WD *when needed* to deal with terrain or weather.

So, when considering the HD IFS, you don’t need SFA to deal with *REAL* work truck and tow rig duties, so why do so many blindly follow the crowd with the “IFS is for yuppies and posers” drivel? You see, many of you guys have it backwards. The REAL tow rigs and working trucks.can make VERY good use of an IFS which is superior for normal street duties. It’s the SFA trucks that are FOR POSERS AND YUPPIES WHO ARE MORE INTERESTED IN WHAT LOOKS COOL AND “TOUGH” rather than what is best for the job.

Stick that in your collective “SFA is king” pipes and smoke it… :stir: :stir: :popcorn:

man, how in the world did I miss this post!

No yuppies here in West Virginia either! Just us Good Old Boys!

Good Old Boys?

Your right that there is no argument. The Dmax has the most stock power, no argument there. True, they may sound like a realy fast gasser. But, its better than sounding like a high powered sewing machine like the new cummins.

:stir:

The most stock power...hmm...Im sure you already know this but, the hp wars between the big 3 are simply to lure people who have no idea what to look for in a truck. For example, the chevy c4500 uses the exact same duramax as the 2500/3500, but......they detune it all the way down to 520 torque. Ever dyno a stock duramax? Youd be lucky to get 275hp! also did you know that out of ford, dodge and chevy..only the chevy looses more than 22% of its power by the time it reaches the rear wheels! They rate everything by the flywheel. I personally dont think that the duramax can hold up to really hard use. Isnt the frame gm uses 2 pieces?(seriouisly, i dont know). The duramax just isnt built to be used as the cummins or the 7.3 PSD was. Now, Im not saying the duramax is bad by any means, but as a farm truck....i juist dont see it lasting to long without problems. Its just too sensitive, like the 6.0. IMO, the duramax is at best a highway truck good for light-mid weight hotshottong.

Ahh!!! The true symbols of power!

You wont be singing that tune when that bad boy breaks down. Extremely conjested and complicated engine for most home mechanics.

Im not sure who your callin' yuppie, I know your not talking about this farmboy. The only yuppies riding around in my truck are the ones stuck in my front grill. And to be quit honest, the dodge trucks just dont hold up to the hard work we put em through. If your easy on em they will, but put em through hard work and they fall apart. Windows, door locks, handles come apart. Engine will last through any hell you put it through, but the doggy dodge falls apart. I probably have more dirt on my dash than your truck has ever seen:stir:

GM trucks have the poorest quality (build wise), have for years, not limited to the truck either. remember when cadillac's were falling apart. Dodge has come a long way in the quality dept. Yep dodges do look like min vans in the inside, lol. but they hold up pretty well. GM uses the worst leather ever.

So, when considering the HD IFS, you don’t need SFA to deal with *REAL* work truck and tow rig duties, so why do so many blindly follow the crowd with the “IFS is for yuppies and posers” drivel? You see, many of you guys have it backwards. The REAL tow rigs and working trucks.can make VERY good use of an IFS which is superior for normal street duties. It’s the SFA trucks that are FOR POSERS AND YUPPIES WHO ARE MORE INTERESTED IN WHAT LOOKS COOL AND “TOUGH” rather than what is best for the job.

Stick that in your collective “SFA is king” pipes and smoke it… :stir: :stir: :popcorn:
Sorry Russ, but thats simply your bias opinion and nothing more. Look across the country at farmers and ranchers....rather you like it or not...these are the people that really test these trucks day in and day out for hard use as debated in this thread. Not people like you and I (even though I am a farmer I keep the Dodge out of the dirt) that hardly tow %25 of the time, and IIRC, I think you have mentioned your towing mileage is an even smaller percentage than that.

Farmers and ranchers usually put their trucks through the paces, pulling discs around, heavy equipment, bumpy roads, and lots of offroad use. Day in and day out of this..... What will you most commonly find on these farms, ranches, and dairies????? Ford Super Duties, followed by Dodges, and GM's in a long last place.

Don't tell me that IFS is supreme for towing and offroad use when the both SFA brands are far favored by the hardest customers throughout our countries farms and ranches. Also funny how the easiest customers that treat their trucks like cars basically except 0%-25% of the time choose GM over the other two.

Don't even get me started on lifted pickups and poser this, poser that. I see 3 IFS Chevies with their roofs scraping across the lunar surface for every Dodge OR Ford around here.

Sorry Russ, but thats simply your bias opinion and nothing more. Look across the country at farmers and ranchers....rather you like it or not...these are the people that really test these trucks day in and day out for hard use as debated in this thread. Not people like you and I (even though I am a farmer I keep the Dodge out of the dirt) that hardly tow %25 of the time, and IIRC, I think you have mentioned your towing mileage is an even smaller percentage than that.

Farmers and ranchers usually put their trucks through the paces, pulling discs around, heavy equipment, bumpy roads, and lots of offroad use. Day in and day out of this..... What will you most commonly find on these farms, ranches, and dairies????? Ford Super Duties, followed by Dodges, and GM's in a long last place.

Don't tell me that IFS is supreme for towing and offroad use when the both SFA brands are far favored by the hardest customers throughout our countries farms and ranches. Also funny how the easiest customers that treat their trucks like cars basically except 0%-25% of the time choose GM over the other two.

Don't even get me started on lifted pickups and poser this, poser that. I see 3 IFS Chevies with their roofs scraping across the lunar surface for every Dodge OR Ford around here.

And you think Russ has a biased opinion, you should turn and look in the mirror. You have to stop and realize that your small view of what goes on in california isnt how the entire country works. Take a trip to the midwest and take a good long look at what trucks do all the work out here. Its the Fords and GM's, dodge is a DISTANT third. The wanabee's drive dodges out here. And im not just talking about farming either, but contractors as well. I rarely deal with construction guys driving dodges, most drive ford trucks and vans. Am I saying this is how the entire country is, no, but it is the way things work everywhere in the midwest i have been.

Your right, it is my opinion, but that’s what “Brand Wars” is all about isn’t it?

Yes, Ford is “#1” on work sites, but that’s at least in part due to their aggressive incentive programs. Don’t they offer the same for agg? And we’ve heard from many fleet mechanics that absolutely HATE Fords that are foisted on them by bean counters in management. And anyone who cares to look can easily find counter examples to that who hate the GMs or Dodges in their fleets, it just depends on what you’re looking for or view you’re trying to support.

And since when has “most common” EVER been and indicator of “best”? Does that mean Craftsman makes better tools the Snap-On? Did that mean domestic vehicles of the 80s were better than imports? Or Detroit is better than Cat (or John Deer that you love so much for that matter)

And on, and on…

See, my problem is not really that I think GM is THE best, or even that IFS is THE best front suspension. What I have a problem with is people like you and others in this thread who feel compelled to put whatever your favorite is up on a pedestal and all but demand that everyone else bow down before it. For me to claim that “IFS is THE best 4x4 option” would be JUST as ridiculous as all the crap about “Cummins is king because it’s a MD motor”, “I6 is best because that’s all you see in OTRs”, “Ford is best because they sell the most”. They are all *based* on some element of truth, and that element WILL have relevance in certain areas, it MAY well apply to the person making the statement, but it DOES NOT lead to the conclusion that the people making the statement are trying to suggest. And when there are limited scenarios where the conclusion is valid, there are too many people determined take their single myopic view of the world and try to apply that globally. .

So I have no problems seeing and admitting that there are applications where I6 is superior to V8, and also the opposite. Likewise there are some applications where IFS is superior and some where SFA is better. But all the hard line “there is one true answer and I’ll tell you what it is” guys leave me feeling I need to take a hard line opposing just to provide some perspective. You guys cover the other side quite well without my input. :D Otherwise, people reading these threads will assume that since there is such overwhelming support for some choice, it MUST be right (the sheeple response). But if I can make an equally credible argument on the other side, at least MAYBE they will be forced to stop and think for themselves to figure out what it all means to them…

And where the devil did you get that I said IFS is “supreme for off road use”? Put the pipe down and step away… ;) Surely you must know I would never be foolish enough to state such a thing. ALL my off-road vehicles have SFA because that is what works best in that application, period…

As for your statement about SFA being the choice for all “the hardest customers”, we’ve had that discussion too. And I believe that it has been pointed out to you at that your experience is pretty much limited to your local area. Experiences posted by others indicated that in their areas they observed results quite different from those you represented as “the way things are”. Then again, even if you are right, and some do agree with your opinions, I’ll restate that “most popular” is not the same as “best”.

On the “easiest customers” choosing GM, assuming it is true (and I don’t think it is) why is that not a valid demographic? Why does that make them “posers”? If they have more criteria and application that support the choice of IFS more than they are interested in criteria that would support SFA, why does that invalidate their choice or the vehicle and label them posers? <shrug> That’s what I’ve been saying all along, that people should choose what suits their needs the best, not what the internet harpies are singing to the rafters. I (like most of us) could get by just fine most of the time with a 1/2 ton regular cab 2WD. I bought an HD 4x4 Crew Cab for those times WHEN I DO NEED IT, and because there were too many times my 2WD 1/2 ton left me wanting more. Why is it some of you guys feel the need to draw a line and say “because I need a HD more than this much, I’m justified in owning one, the rest of you are posers.”?

And again, just because you see Ford (or Dodge, or GM) on the work sites of farms does NOT make them the best, EVEN AT THAT APPLICATION. Things are far more complex than that, just like it is when evaluating the empty assertion that “CTD is best because it is a MD motor”.

And finally, why would I care if you point out all the lifted Chevies? Yes, there are plenty of posers out there driving a Chevy. And to make it even worse, the choice of a Chevy for that use is particularly foolish given the problems of lifted IFS plus the cost. But the yuppies and “posers” have their representatives among all the trucks. I think we can all pretty much discount those folks and lump them in the same category as the ricers with PVC cages and JC Whitney “wings” and “tips” on their stock Accords. What I’m talking about are the “real posser” (hows that for a turn on words? :D) crowd you guys want to attribute to GM customers. The ones who want you to think they are driving a real working truck. Sure, they exist, I don’t deny it at all. But for a yuppie/poser, which do you think is going to be more appealing to shore up their “wanna be working man” image and provide the best “compensating boost”? A truck that the most vocal folks around are always crowing about, or the one that the vocal crowd is determined to represent as “inferior”?

Geez, you would think I'm readin war and peace, you guys have a lot to say. I just found this site, I'm still amazed how the big 3 can all be on the same site. I figured I'd see guns blazin. I don't like the styling of the Chevy, and the GMC looks real good, but it's all about the engine. I would rather have my door handles and knobs breaking vs. my engine crappin out. I think all of the diesels are goin downhill with all the EGR and everything coming up. Soon its gonna be illegal to put boxes on our trucks. And you GM guys watch out, the cp3's are out for the new rams, big, big power.:pimp:

I'm runnin for cover!

Oh, and just to be clear, maybe I should define what I mean by "poser".

To me it's really one of 2 breeds.

1) The full on poser who builds something that "looks" the part, but it's all show. Hondas with wings and exhaust tips. Stock 2bbl Camaros with "big-n-littles", lifted 4x4s that never go off the pavement. That type of thing...

2) The ones who bought something they have no intention of ever using. People like the middle aged lawyer in downtown Scottsdale driving a Ferrari around town, or the guy down the street with a F250 all trimmed out with no hitch, nothing to haul, and nothing more than groceries have ever or will ever go in the bed.

But even at that, while I do consider them posers, I couldn't care less except to sorta feel sorry for them, sometimes combined with a little bit of contempt for not being self confident enough to make rational decisions based on more than appearance and how others perceive them.

Hey Beeram, welcome aboard!

LOL, no need to run for cover. We’re really all friends here, for the most part anyway… ;) That’s actually what I think is best about this site. We’ve got people with strong feelings on all sides of the various points of contention. If you go to a “focused” site, it’s like “preaching to the choir” and it's too easy to start feeling like "this is the one true way". Here, if you want to make a statement of “fact” on a point of contention, you better be ready to back it up, because somebody will call you on it. Debates like this (only allowed in Brand Wars by the way) really make us think about our prejudices, biases, and opinions as we work together (and against each other) trying to find the real facts.

Jump right in, the water’s fine!
Except over by Bobbie, he pees in the water! ;) rotfl

Great point bad dog, and the best feeling is racin a rice-burner and seein the look on their face. But I don't get it, I rarely get people who want to race, it's annoying. BTW, we have a camper we pull, and 4 ATV's with our suburban, so no posin here.waytogo

Good Old Boys?
Ya know, country boys, rednecks,the opposite of a yuppie. Ah, forget it. You wouldn't understand.

You wont be singing that tune when that bad boy breaks down. Extremely conjested and complicated engine for most home mechanics.
Yes it is complicated, but I'm the average home mechanic, and I wouldn't be afaraid to attempt anything on a Duramax that I had the confidence to do. If I don't understand how it works I'm not going to mess with it.
IMO, all the newer engines are made too complicated. What about the new Ford gas engines? All those plastic covers and plumbing. Those are congested too. At least you can see a Hemi or Vortec.

GM trucks have the poorest quality (build wise), have for years, not limited to the truck either. remember when cadillac's were falling apart. Dodge has come a long way in the quality dept. Yep dodges do look like min vans in the inside, lol. but they hold up pretty well. GM uses the worst leather ever.
I think all the stock leather could be better. Yes, GM's is bad, but Ford's is bad too. I sat in a 2005 F 250 Lariat at Cabela's and it was way too slippery. I prefer cloth, GM cloth seats are the best I've seen. Way better than that cheap cloth Ford uses. I don't know about Dodge, I haven't been in one of the new trucks yet.

Everybody in my family owns some kind of GM, none have ever fallen apart. Yes, there are squeaks and rattles when they get older, but the build quality is not bad. Now I do agree with you on some of the cheaper vehicles, like base S-10s and Aveos. Their quality is garbage as far I'm concerned, but you get what you pay for. I think thats why some guys think the GM has poor quality.

BTW, what Caddys were falling apart? I'm not trying to argue any facts with that question, I'm just not sure what you mean.

Most truck owners could care less about the leather. All the stock leather seats suck. Yes, GM's is bad, but Ford's is bad too. I sat in a 2006 F 250 Lariat at Cabela's and it was too slippery. I prefer cloth, GM cloth seats are the best I've seen. Way better than that cheap cloth Ford uses. I don't know about Dodge, I haven't been in one of the new trucks yet.
Everybody in my family owns some kind of GM, none have ever fallen apart. Yes, there are squeaks and rattles when they get older, but the build quality is not bad. Now I do agree with you on some of the cheaper vehicles, like base S-10s and Aveos. Their quality is garbage as far I'm concerned, but you get what you pay for. I think thats why some guys think the GM has poor quality.

BTW, what Caddys were falling apart? I'm not trying to argue any facts with that question, I'm just not sure what you mean.
I agree on the leather, it all sucks, including mine, though it's holding up just fine really. And Dodge cloth is actually very nice, I liked it in my Ram.

The Caddys in question were just like all the 80s and early 90s domestics, pretty much crap across the board. Only diff was, you paid a lot more for the crap that said Caddy on the side just to get some extra cheap chrome film coated plastic on what was otherwise exactly the same junk.

I agree on the leather, it all sucks, including mine, though it's holding up just fine really. And Dodge cloth is actually very nice, I liked it in my Ram.

The Caddys in question were just like all the 80s and early 90s domestics, pretty much crap across the board. Only diff was, you paid a lot more for the crap that said Caddy on the side just to get some extra cheap chrome film coated plastic on what was otherwise exactly the same junk.

Cool, I didn't know about the Dodge cloth. waytogo
That sucks about those cars. I never heard of trouble with the Caddys, I was just a little kid back then!:pimp:

Hey Beeram, welcome aboard!

LOL, no need to run for cover. We’re really all friends here, for the most part anyway… ;) That’s actually what I think is best about this site. We’ve got people with strong feelings on all sides of the various points of contention. If you go to a “focused” site, it’s like “preaching to the choir” and it's too easy to start feeling like "this is the one true way". Here, if you want to make a statement of “fact” on a point of contention, you better be ready to back it up, because somebody will call you on it. Debates like this (only allowed in Brand Wars by the way) really make us think about our prejudices, biases, and opinions as we work together (and against each other) trying to find the real facts.

Jump right in, the water’s fine!
Except over by Bobbie, he pees in the water! ;) rotfl

Exactly what he said. You will like it here. Well, no commoent on Bobbie peeing in the waterrotfl Everyone here is cool as a fanwaytogo

BTW, my leather suks too. its turning blue from my jeans. King ranch has the nicest leather, but wayyyyy overpriced.

BigHD, your absolutely right, all these new motors suk! Most people dont believe me when I tell them that the egr's on diesels are engine killers. Too many computer controlled functions on these motors. Hell, I can barely keep my computer from crashing! Remember when everything was mechanical, those were the days.:doah:

HEY! Give me a break....I had a lot to drink that night and everbody but me wanted to get in the pool.....rotfl

Russ,

I've been in 23 different states. Just 6 weeks ago I was in Nevada, Idaho, and Montana. There were more Fords pulling snowmobile trailers than anything, with about equal GM's and Dodges.

Single out California if you'd like....but farming is farming rather it's in California or New York.

No one can convince me that Dodges and Fords are not the best for farmers and ranchers when they are favored. It has nearly nothing to do with incentives, most of the people I know buy used anyway and I don't know anyone with a base model fleet truck that bought it because it was cheap. Most farmers and ranchers actually buy fairly loaded trucks. Why do you think the King Ranch edition was created?

HEY! Give me a break....I had a lot to drink that night and everbody but me wanted to get in the pool.....rotfl


No one can convince me that Dodges and Fords are not the best for farmers and ranchers when they are favored. It has nearly nothing to do with incentives, most of the people I know buy used anyway and I don't know anyone with a base model fleet truck that bought it because it was cheap. Most farmers and ranchers actually buy fairly loaded trucks. Why do you think the King Ranch edition was created?


ROTFLMAO......now, about the second part, I agree 100% with you.

I think all the stock leather could be better. Yes, GM's is bad, but Ford's is bad too. I sat in a 2005 F 250 Lariat at Cabela's and it was way too slippery. I prefer cloth, GM cloth seats are the best I've seen. Way better than that cheap cloth Ford uses. I don't know about Dodge, I haven't been in one of the new trucks yet.

The main problem with today's leather vehicles is its too thin! Thats what I think. My dad's burb's driver seat tore at less than 100K, very thin leather. Although I like the sweade and leather combination in the late model Dodges, it doesn't look like it will last due to the thickness.

I think the best leather is the King Ranch, nice thick tough leather, and the earlier 2nd gen Dodges that have the thicker tougher leather. It's not as soft as the GM's and new Dodges and is probably why Dodge started to use the thin stuff instead (do I credit this the "I want a smoother ride" crowd?:stir: ). I have seen the 2nd gen thick rougher leather wear great. My seat has little to no signs of wear at 121K, neither does my dad's at 107K, and my neighbors lifted '97 looks great still. Anyone that has ever had a lifted truck knows what that does to seats.

It's too bad the big three wouldn't go back to some of the thicker tougher leathers...sure, it isn't as soft but at least it holds up.

Geez, you would think I'm readin war and peace, you guys have a lot to say. I just found this site, I'm still amazed how the big 3 can all be on the same site. I figured I'd see guns blazin.

Welcome! That is whats great about this site, most of us are friends (as good as it gets on the internet anyway) and get along great. Welcome to the forums!
http://towrig.com/photos/data/512/All_the_rigs_in_Idaho.jpg

It really stinks to pay over $35K for something and you get a plastic dash, poor quality seats, and marginal braking system.

BigHD, your absolutely right, all these new motors suk! Most people dont believe me when I tell them that the egr's on diesels are engine killers. Too many computer controlled functions on these motors. Hell, I can barely keep my computer from crashing! Remember when everything was mechanical, those were the days.:doah:
Those were the days Frank!waytogo I kinda wish they were back!

Welcome! That is whats great about this site, most of us are friends (as good as it gets on the internet anyway) and get along great. Welcome to the forums!
I agree! Welcome to Tow Rig!waytogo

The most stock power...hmm...Im sure you already know this but, the hp wars between the big 3 are simply to lure people who have no idea what to look for in a truck. For example, the chevy c4500 uses the exact same duramax as the 2500/3500, but......they detune it all the way down to 520 torque. Ever dyno a stock duramax? Youd be lucky to get 275hp! also did you know that out of ford, dodge and chevy..only the chevy looses more than 22% of its power by the time it reaches the rear wheels! They rate everything by the flywheel. I personally dont think that the duramax can hold up to really hard use. Isnt the frame gm uses 2 pieces?(seriouisly, i dont know). The duramax just isnt built to be used as the cummins or the 7.3 PSD was. Now, Im not saying the duramax is bad by any means, but as a farm truck....i juist dont see it lasting to long without problems. Its just too sensitive, like the 6.0. IMO, the duramax is at best a highway truck good for light-mid weight hotshottong.

Have you ever worked on a farm? you can take a tank and destroy if its used as a farm truck. But, the dmax will last a long time, trust me. Isuzu has been around alot longer than the powerstroke has. I once heard that isuzu has been making diesel engines longer than most. Im not sure if that is true, but I do know they've been around a long time. The problem isnt the engine holding up though, its the rest of the truck. In my personal experience, GM and Ford hold up the best. I think the dodges come apart the fastest. The Dmax is actually a better highway truck, and farm truck, than the 7.3 though. If the 7.3 was just as good or better, it still be in production.:stir:

waytogo waytogo
Right there with ya BADDOG!!!!!

As I recall, Isuzu is one of the largest diesel manufacturer in the world, perhaps THE largest (I seem to recall being told that, though I don't know). I agree, the engine is fine and a perfect (IMO) fit for LD truck use.

On the 7.3, it's a very good engine, just "old school" by modern standards. It probably would still be in the Fords if it were not for fuel and emissions changes. And NS still makes them for MD and over-seas use in Fords.

Have you ever worked on a farm? you can take a tank and destroy if its used as a farm truck. But, the dmax will last a long time, trust me. Isuzu has been around alot longer than the powerstroke has. I once heard that isuzu has been making diesel engines longer than most. Im not sure if that is true, but I do know they've been around a long time. The problem isnt the engine holding up though, its the rest of the truck. In my personal experience, GM and Ford hold up the best. I think the dodges come apart the fastest. The Dmax is actually a better highway truck, and farm truck, than the 7.3 though. If the 7.3 was just as good or better, it still be in production.:stir:

Lets see where to start first...Yes I farm. Izuzu has been around for quite a while now, but that has no bearing on the 6.6 duramax. International has been around just as long or longer as with Cummins. The Duramax itself has only been out since 2001 model year! The 7.3 Powerstroke since 1994. The isb Cummins, ooh, much longer than both. Anyways, my point is just because the company has been there doesnt mean that particular motor has. Farm conditions are quite different from otr road conditions. I dont doubt that it will last long, but, it wont on a farm. I cant prove that, but its all in the way the engine is set up. It takes the duramax high rpms to get max use out of the engine like the 6.0, on a farm, there wont room or time for that, you will need low rpm power like the 7.3 or the cummins. Idle time is also an issue for the dmax with those egr's. Everyone knows that on a farm, Our trucks idle quite a bit and run looong at extremely low speeds. You wont see the dmax in garbage trucks, 50ft busses, 40k cab and chassis trucks etc...but you will find plenty of cummins and 7.3's. Actually you find a few 6.0's in those applications too. Trust me the Dmax just isnt set up to be that kind of motor. You will find some farm trucks that have the dmax. Guess we would just have to find a farmer with one and ask his opinion.:popcorn: For the record, I think the dmax is an awesome motor.

Like baddog said, The 7.3 powerstroke is alive and well and still being produced for "real" medium and heavy duty IH trucks trucks in the US and light duty trucks everywhere but the US . The EPA made strictor emissions rules here in the US that the 7.3 could not pass. Therefore they had to stop using the motor. If not for the EPA, the 7.3 would still be the option. Why do you think that cummins is changing the motor in the dodges? EPA emissions rules! The EPS sucks big time IMO!

I agree these newer emission rules suck. I didnt know the 7.3 was still being produced. But I strongly disagree with you about the dmax not being a good farm truck. I know several people running em on their farms and have no complaints. They work good. Also, the dmax max hp is at higher rpm, but their max torque is at 1600 rpm,just like the cummins, and I believe lower than the 7.3.(NOT POSITIVE). My truck also has 5100 hrs on, most from ideling. No problems. I agree the cummins is more bullet proof, but the dmax is extremly tough. More than you realize. Yes, the dmax hasnt been around very long, but isuzu has been around long enough to know what their doing. When gm introduced the 6.0 gas, people didnt wait around to see how they'd last, they already knew about the reputation of their earlier engines like the 350. I know this dosent mean the dmax will last 500,000 miles, but i am still very impressed with em.

No doubt, the dmax is the bomb, as the young folks say. I am in no way implying that its junk, far from it. What i wrote about it being a farm truck is just my opinion, and you know what they say about opinions,lolrotfl Oh, and I stand corrected about the Dmax torque rpms, you are absolutely correct.

Yeah, kinda suks, we cant get the new 7.3.

Don't even get me started on lifted pickups and poser this, poser that. I see 3 IFS Chevies with their roofs scraping across the lunar surface for every Dodge OR Ford around here.

Now now, I'm not getting involved in this except to say that I live in the same town as RJF here, and I must say, that's bunk. Ford Superdutys are CLEARLY the truck of choice for the flatbiller crowd to lift 12 inches and mount tires that are entirely too small, with $3000 worth of shocks and chrome plated everything. Clearly. Sure, there are some Chevies and Dodges with the same ridiculous getup, but the Fords are dominant for that crowd.

Marc

Out here, most people buy the Fords to lift and put bigger tires on also. You can drive down the road and see a bunch of 4 door F-250's with 4 or 6 inch lift, stittng on 35's or 38's. See more dodges now since the body change in 03.

That's because the Ford Super Duties from 1999(?)-2004 have the simpilest suspension to put a lift kit on. Same with the 1973-1987 Chevy and GMC's. Leaves in the front and leaves in the back. Not too difficult. Now that the new 2005 Ford radius arm/coil spring setup has come out, I've seen less and less lifted new Fords around here.

Off Topic,

You guys do know that I used to have a 03' Duramax, didnt you. absolutely loved it to death. The only reason I got rid of it was I got spooked when an injector(s) went south (I know thats a lousy reason so guys give me a break). I was afraid that the fuel in the crank case would cause future problems. At the time I still had my '95 PSD 289k virtually trouble free, so I said what the heck, might as well stay with the PSD so Long story short, Just ended up getting a newer version of the same truck. My wife says Im stupid for doing that, she just doesnt understand.lol Here is a pic of it.

Looking in hind site, If knew then that i could have disconnected and rerouted the egr, I would have thought twice about getting rid of it! Guys have been doing that lately and from what I here, having damn good results too.

How many miles were on your truck when then injector went out? I had one go out at around 95,000. Maybe you can answer a question that I am not sure about. The injectors that GM replaces em with, are they the exact same injectors, or are the updated so the problem should not happen again? How do like the 7.3 compared to the duramax. I was looking at fords before my dmax, I would have definitly gone with the 7.3 over the 6.0 We have a 95 powerstroke on the farm with about 260,000 miles. Still runs good. Dosent have as much power as it use to have. Gets the job done, but nothing like our newer trucks.

They are supposed to put the newer style bosh injectors in them. My truck had about 122k, if I remember right when the injector(s) went. After they fixed it, It still smoked a bit out of the tailpipe at idle, so they replaced them again:doah: Not knowing at the time that they were supposed to replace them all, so I agreed to them replacing 2.

The '02 7.3 is kool, I like it, mainly cause i can take it apart and put it back together in my sleep. The dmax wins in most catagories. However it does seem that the 7.3 has more low end power. Id rather climb a grade with a trailer in the 7.3. After driving a duramax and climbing into the 7.3 you immediately notice the difference. More power and better throttle response on the dmax. I try not to get cought up in the hp wars because its really all about torque and how the motor achieves it, IMO. Also the later 7.3, like mine, are way quieter than the 94-99's. The only reason I chose the 7.3 is because thats what I had experience with. i feel more comfortable if I break down on the road in the 7.3. Plus im a big fan of the diesel rattle, lol

On a side note, the 7.3 isnt as slow as many people think!

Looks like it was a nice truck Frank!waytogo I do agree, the 7.3 is a good motor. I'd pick it over the 6.0 any day.

Looks like it was a nice truck Frank!waytogo I do agree, the 7.3 is a good motor. I'd pick it over the 6.0 any day.

I cant see owning a 6.0:eek:

Man, let me tell ya, That truck had everything possible! Times like now I am regretting ever getting rid of it. Like i said, my wife still to this day calls me stupid for getting rid of it. I had a bull/brush bar on the front and stainless running boards. xm radio and whole nine yards.

Thats why I think GM is better, its the whole nine yards. I like the others, just not as well!!!:D

O.K. O.K., GM has the transmission, Dodge has the engine, and Ford has the body. How about that :popcorn:

Not really but I'm tryin to make everybody happy :stir:

O.K. O.K., GM has the transmission, Dodge has the engine, and Ford has the body. How about that :popcorn:

Not really but I'm tryin to make everybody happy :stir:

LOL, good one!

I agree those new duramaxs' look,ride,and (if you like quiet) sound good too! My old 98 cummins 12V looks rough,rides rough,but we don't know how those new duramaxs' will ride,look,and sound after pulling a 3 car wedge for over 300K miles now do we???? (98 dodge Quad Cab CTD 12V 5 Speed ) :confused: :D vacarman02

vacarman02, Welcome to the site!

Its whats under the hood, then personal preference. Think about it like this. While I may not be the first one to the top of the hill, I can do with 6 cylinders what you do with 8 and I probably squeez a few more mpg's doing it. And if V8 diesels were built for pulling, every KW, Pete and frieghtliner out there would have something other than a STRAIT 6!

waytogo Brian

And if V8 diesels were built for pulling, every KW, Pete and frieghtliner out there would have something other than a STRAIT 6!

waytogo BrianWhile I would agree with this in OTR trucks, and would also agree with pickups if everyone that owned a diesel pickup were loaded down at max GCWR all the time. What the Ford and especially the Dmax guys say is that the V8's are better when empty for around town and acceleration and that the ISB isn't king because these pickups are used as cars by most people, not loaded down like an OTR truck 24/7. While I've never actually seen any benifets in person of having one of the two V8's when empty that is claimed by their owners over an ISB.....I will say that they have strong grounds to say that the V8 diesels are just as good as the ISB in a light truck simply because they aren't loaded hardly ever, which is where the ISB shines.

Yes and OTR trucks have Inline 6's for ease of maintenence, economy, and reliability. As everybody knows these trucks rack up more miles in a year than a diesel pickup will travel in a lifetime. The reason at least IMO, for V8 diesels in pickups is exactly what Bobby said. They are all great motors no matter what.

I agree those new duramaxs' look,ride,and (if you like quiet) sound good too! My old 98 cummins 12V looks rough,rides rough,but we don't know how those new duramaxs' will ride,look,and sound after pulling a 3 car wedge for over 300K miles now do we???? (98 dodge Quad Cab CTD 12V 5 Speed ) :confused: :D vacarman02

Actually, there are several people out there with 300K on their D-maxs and still running strong. I wont argue with the fact that the Cummins will generally last longer, thats a great engine. But, I had a 95 12 valve 5 speed with 300k on it. The engine still ran strong, but the rest of the truck was falling apart. I think the Cummins is slight better than the dmax in fuel mileage and longevity, but we have an 03 cummins and my 02 Dmax pulls better. If the 03 had a manual it might be a different story, I just prefer GM. By the way, the 98 12 valve is a bad a$$ engine, thats a good truck you have. You can get more power out of that engine for alot cheaper than any other diesel engine out there.

Its whats under the hood, then personal preference. Think about it like this. While I may not be the first one to the top of the hill, I can do with 6 cylinders what you do with 8 and I probably squeez a few more mpg's doing it. And if V8 diesels were built for pulling, every KW, Pete and frieghtliner out there would have something other than a STRAIT 6!

waytogo Brian

I disagree on the personal preference. I think its just the opposite. I dont think it matters what under the hood. I have a GM not for the DMAX, but for the actual truck. I wanted a bigger back seat and smoother ride for all the hunting and 4 wheeling I do. I love the brand wars and the competition, but anymore, you really cant go wrong with the PSD, DMAX, or Cummins. There all good. Im not disagreeing with you on the big rigs. All our tractors have inlines for a reason. I just like the way the V8's run on the highway with a load better than the ilines.

I disagree on the personal preference. I think its just the opposite. I dont think it matters what under the hood. I have a GM not for the DMAX, but for the actual truck. I wanted a bigger back seat and smoother ride for all the hunting and 4 wheeling I do. I love the brand wars and the competition, but anymore, you really cant go wrong with the PSD, DMAX, or Cummins. There all good. Im not disagreeing with you on the big rigs. All our tractors have inlines for a reason. I just like the way the V8's run on the highway with a load better than the ilines.

Well said!waytogo Come on guys, we have to get this thread up to ten pages!

I don't know what yuppies you are taliking about either. Friend bought a 1996 K1500 put 6 six inch lift and 36 inch tires. We mudded and even JUMPED IT, YEAH I SAID JUMPED IT, a few times. Went up to his cabin quite a bit in the winter. I was jumping a 1985 Suburban 1/2 ton a dozen times. Highest I ever jumped it was about 6 feet in the air. My buddy sold his truck with a little over a 100K on it.
6 feet?? must have been a soft landing. Jumping 1 maybe 2 feet in a blazer with 33" tires bent a 1/2 ton axle tube (axle was from a burb).

Lots of guys are comparing old trucks to new trucks, definitely not apples to apples. The new Dodges and GM's are light years ahead of the older trucks (I have no real experience with Fords other than POS work trucks).

While IFS is arguably better on the street, when test driving 2005 3/4 tons the Chevy ride was disappointing, it seemed no better than the Dodge. With so many guys saying how much better they rode, maybe I was expecting too much? GM needs better brakes. And for the Dodge quad cab vs GM crew cab argument, well you'd think we are talking about a few feet! IIRC the Dodge quad cab is in the middle between the Chevy extended and crew cabs, so your talking less than 3", big deal. GM is somewhat over priced (gotta pay for all those retirees) and the styling just plain sucks. Was it GM that had no snow plow prep with the diesel, wtf is that?? GMs are also the most car like imho. Nothing wrong with that, but having a center console in a real pickup is just wrong.:D

Now if GM were to make a 3/4 ton Avalanche, based on the 2002 model year and refrain from cladding the thing in cheesy plastic and put in the Dmax (with good injectors) and sell it for a reasonable price.......

I won't comment on the IFS except to say the ride on mine is noticeably better than any of the others I test drove in '02, but mainly it's the solid handling/steering (particularly on "washboard" and really rough roads) and “whoops” that makes me an IFS fan.

GM brakes after '01 are rather good IMO. No idea how they stack up against the competition in hard numbers, but I lost my trailer brakes at some point while down in NM a year or so ago with about 15K gross. Didn't even realize I lost them until I tried (and succeeded) to make a last minute decel for an off-ramp when my daughter announced a need to stop and I knew it was MILES to the next stop. Big fat 4 wheel disks and anti-lock and drum e-brake has been flawless on my '02. Good enough for my needs...

And as an owner of a 98 Dodge quad cab which was replaced with the ’02 GM crew, I can assure you that the rear seat plus head and leg room of my CC is MUCH bigger than the QC, as can my 6’2”+ son who often rides back there.

I do agree on the console. I really wanted my Silverado with cloth and a 40/20/40 bench like my Dodge. I really miss the cloth seats and bench. :(

Not much I have to say about the Avalanche that would not be considered rude, so I’ll pass… ;)

It was hard to get the picture at the right time. I wish we would have had video and then just taken a clip. Top picture is in Patterson, CA and bottom is in Long Barn by Sonora, CA. The first picture was only a couple of feet in the air. The bottom was around 6 foot or more. The hill I am jumping was about 6 foot high. The truck did land smooth and always landed on all four wheels at the same time.

I have pictures of my buddies 1975 Blazer jumping and he always did a nose dive. And so did my friends girlfriends jeep. My Sub always landed even.

Top picture is in Patterson, CA and bottom is in Long Barn by Sonora, CA.

Hey, you were over in my neck of the woods!waytogo

It was hard to get the picture at the right time. I wish we would have had video and then just taken a clip. Top picture is in Patterson, CA and bottom is in Long Barn by Sonora, CA. The first picture was only a couple of feet in the air. The bottom was around 6 foot or more. The hill I am jumping was about 6 foot high. The truck did land smooth and always landed on all four wheels at the same time.

Great pics!waytogo

i think those fotos are fake, lets see some video insted!

o come you just could not handle a bad ASS ford sitting in your diveway

Yeah. Your a funny guy CHILLLS.

Are you just making posts so your not a little half ton hauler anymore?

Next time you get your bada$$ Ford stuck, just give me a beep, I'll come pull you out.

i dont need to have two gm's pull me out!!!

and if thats what it takes to get out of the 1/2 ton section then play ball

i do have to say you did pick a good color

Right on. I don't know how many posts you have to do to get the 1 TON.

1999GMC Cool picts. That jump in the bottom picture looks like the makings for some hard landings! Makes the berm that bent my axle look like a speed bump.

Baddog...comparing old to new again:doah: . The new Ram QCs have almost 5 more inches of leg room compared to your 98 model. New to new Ram QC beats Chevy CC in all areas of rear seat room except leg room, where the Chevy has a wopping 2.4" more. 2.4" is not a good reason to buy one truck over the other one.

http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/dodge/rampickup2500/100604865/VehicleComparison;jsessionid=GHxTJTrxpjwFY1vtjGNst WCg5T247HwXgt3TdjkQwsbb241zDBSv!1688806684?basesty leid=100604865&styleid=100556620&styleid=100536475&styleid=100556963&maxvehicles=5&refid=&op=3&tab=specs

I agree the IFS should be better on washboard and be less susceptible to DW as well. I don’t think the GM ride was deficient, it just wasn’t much better, if any, than the Dodge. It just shows how far suspension design has come when a straight axle rides and handles as well as the Dodge does. So maybe a slight advantage to GM. (Not enough to make up for GM's butt ugly styling, but take heart, Dodge seems hell bent on morphing the RAM into some kind of a transformer toy looking abortion, similar to what they've done to Dakota and Durango, so by comparison the GM's might start looking good again:eek: ).

Thanks brods. I was young and stupid and I'm guessing very lucky. The jump on the bottom was the last time I jumped it and that was in 1997. I drove the truck with no alignment issues until I sold it 8 months ago. I honestly can't believe that truck was still in one piece we used to go wheeling alot.

Oh okay, so you have two Fords now chills?

i think you guys are smoking something if you cant feel the difference in ride. Down the road there isnt much, but off road for a whole day in a gmc 2500 4x4 and then a dodge 2500 4x4 and you'll feel the difference, believe me. The mega cab is huge, but ugly as sin, and you CANNOT get in a long bed. How stupid. The dodges quad cab is smaller than GMC's by just a little bit, but it makes a world of difference when you actually have to ride back there for more than 20 minutes. The dodges back seat is just so uncomfortable.:stir:

i think you guys are smoking something if you cant feel the difference in ride. Down the road there isnt much, but off road for a whole day in a gmc 2500 4x4 and then a dodge 2500 4x4 and you'll feel the difference, believe me. The mega cab is huge, but ugly as sin, and you CANNOT get in a long bed. How stupid. The dodges quad cab is smaller than GMC's by just a little bit, but it makes a world of difference when you actually have to ride back there for more than 20 minutes. The dodges back seat is just so uncomfortable.:stir:
I agree. I like the Ford back seat too, its comfortable even with the front seats all the way back. I think my extended cab Chevy has about the same room as a Quad Cab Dodge. At least it feels that way. Also, the Dodges back seat sits too straight up in the back for me to get comfortable.

I've been driving my dad's surburban through the foothills up to the hospital to see him after he broke his leg on saturday. The last 3 days I have driven it 65miles a day through windy mountain roads. The first day I drove my Ram up there, so I was able to compare.

Whats my feeling on IFS vs a solid axle now? I'm still not impressed with IFS. I felt my D60 equipped Ram was able to take some of the foothill curves just as fast if not faster due to the truck feeling more stable than the IFS burb.

On the road, I cant see much difference. They turn and feel the same im sure. I just think the IFS is softer off road compared to solid front axle, its easier on the kidneys. Sorry to hear bout your dads leg RJF, hope he's doing ok.

Bobby, we’ve been here before, you are still not comparing apples and apples. What you describe has NOTHING to do with IFS specifically.

Burb has softer suspension (being primarily a passenger transport vehicle with moderate hauling capability) and a lot more "up high" weight too. So, more body roll is to be expected along with the accompanying feel of instability. A Lincoln Town Car and a Corvette both have IFS, but I seem to recall they handle quite differently.

Or, if your analysis is correct, maybe GM should put an old 40's style solid axle under a Corvette? Or maybe there is a reason that solid suspension (even in the back) is fading away year by year?

Again, as I see it, the characteristics that set IFS apart from SFA (on the topic at hand) fall primarily in 2 categories.

1) Lower unsprung weight. This IS a HUGE improvement and is not open for debate. It is a known physical effect that not only backed up by industry and many years of racing, but also by the laws of Physics which do not change to suit pre-dispositions. If you like, go to any racing (including desert racing), rally, or even a more sedate auto aficionado site and debate it there. Or talk to a mechanical engineer or anyone familiar with the related Physics. Alloy wheels did not initially become popular because the “look cool”. And tire manufacturers do not go to great lengths to reduce weight just for fun. Every pound you remove from unsprung weight has a measurable (and often quite noticeable) effect on handling, particularly on rough roads of any kind.

2) Tire orientation. SFA can do a better job of maintaining an even, consistent contact patch AND it can change parameters based on input. Things like changing caster, camber, and even toe (though sometimes to detriment like the notorious Ford TIB/TTB suspension) based on suspension input does make a measurable difference and can be seen on Slalom, road, or skid pan courses. My GTP has over-all suspension geometry just like a standard Grand Prix, but with the Competition Group it gets different suspension alignment parameters.

As discussed many times before “ride” has little to do with anything since it is generally very subjective and it is also more a characteristic of spring rate, sprung weight (inertia), and shock valving than suspension implementation and geometry (though there is some cross over).

I’m not saying that SFA does not have its strong points, to do that would be foolish. But constantly trying to shore up SFA as being every bit as good or better than IFS in every category makes even less sense… Give points to SFA where SFA is superior, give points to IFS where IFS is superior, and look else where for the remaining stuff…

Blah blah blah, I am not nearly interested enough to pay close attention to desert racers, corvettes, blah blah. Yes they run IFS, like I care. I am interested in trucks and SUV's. If I was interested in desert racing I wouldn't be on this forum. Nor do I care how IFS does offroad, if I want to go offroading I will ride my snowmobile, atv, or in a long third my K5. I only care about on road handling with the topic on hand.

The IFS thumpers always say it handles better than SFA on the road and through the turns. I said I had driven my dad's burb through windy roads with lots of higher speed curves the last few days. I said I did not notice any better handling from the IFS burb. I didn't say anything about the ride quality, that can't even be compared, one is a 3/4T diesel and the other is a 1/2 car with a suburban body.

I was going to ask you if it was a half ton? My friend bought a 1996 1/2 ton and the first time I road in it I thought it was way to soft and plowed on those little a$$ tires. My lifted 85 suburban handled way better I thought. My other buddy bought a 99 crew cab Chevy dually and I couldn't believe how well it handled. But it also has load E tires and had a little stiffer suspension. That is what changed my mind about buying my truck. I totally agree with RJF on a 1/2 ton not cornering well. I personally don't think GM ever should have made a 1/2 ton suburban anyway. I think it is way to heavy of a truck.

But the point is relevant to the "topic on hand". Lower unsprung weight DOES improve handling anywhere you want to consider, including on the road in a truck. And dynamic suspension adjustment DOES improve handling. My reference to other areas was only supporting evidence. The ONLY place you ever here anyone even attempting to claim that it does not matter is when you are talking to a Dodge or Ford fan (aka "SFA thumpers") about 4WD front suspension options in tow rigs. Apparently in that application the well established "best practices" as well as the laws of physics change...

Here is another point for you (though not a new one). If the 2 points I mentioned above don’t matter for a tow rig, then why don’t the manufacturers go with a 1950 era solid beam front axle on 2WD instead of the much more complex IFS? Not only is it simpler to make with far fewer parts, but they could save on total number of parts by using the 4x4 suspensions across the board. Less variation on the assembly line with less parts to engineer, produce, and stock. Man, what are those morons thinking putting IFS in 2WD trucks when they could save all that money… And since MD and heavy trucks run solid beam front suspension, then it simply MUST be better in a LD truck just like a Cummins… :rolleyes:

:stir: :poke:

Russ, you go into so much detail, DON'T.

I'm not interested.

Yes, the laws of physics do not change on or offroad when it comes to unsprung weight, camber, toe, etc.
But that is not what this is all about, it's that I did not notice any better handling or cornering from the IFS burb, it's that simple Russ....

Throw all the technical stuff out and go drive something.... because that is what matters in the end, and I will say it for the last time. The burb didn't handle any better than my SFA Ram, thats it. Less unsprung weight, better camber, different suspension movement....it all didn't matter...why didn't it? Because I couldn't tell one bit of better cornering performance, it's that simple.

I was going to ask you if it was a half ton? My friend bought a 1996 1/2 ton and the first time I road in it I thought it was way to soft and plowed on those little a$$ tires. My lifted 85 suburban handled way better I thought. My other buddy bought a 99 crew cab Chevy dually and I couldn't believe how well it handled. But it also has load E tires and had a little stiffer suspension. That is what changed my mind about buying my truck. I totally agree with RFJ on a 1/2 ton not cornering well. I personally don't think GM ever should have made a 1/2 ton suburban anyway. I think it is way to heavy of a truck. Yeah it's a half ton, that may have made a difference. Sure did float nice down the road though.:D

...And since MD and heavy trucks run solid beam front suspension, then it simply MUST be better in a LD truck just like a Cummins… :rolleyes:
Hey, no fair! You can't use the other sides argument preemptively! Can’t argue with your statements on IFS except that in this application it would appear GM’s IFS is not up to the task (or their frames are not) since you can’t hang a snow plow on a Dmax. So for people who want to plow snow with a diesel pickup, giving up the "advantages" of IFS for a SFA is well worth it.

Its all about individual priorities. If you drive on washboard roads all day long, IFS may be more important for you. If you regularly have full grown adults ride for hours in the back seat, then rear seat comfort is more important. If you prefer a proven heavy duty engine with a long track record of success, rather than taking a chance on a relatively young engine with a short track record of teething problems, then which engine the truck has is of more importance. If you plow snow, then a real diesel truck with a front end strong enough to hang a snow plow on has more importance.:stir:

It all depends. Overall Gm isn’t better or worse, it just has different strengths and weaknesses.

You can't put a snowplow on the front of a Dmax? The campground I go to alot has a Chevy truck like mine with a snowplow on front. What's up with the Dmax's?

Brods:

I couldn't agree more, it's all about what works for you. I just get tired of all the silliness that comes out of supporting a favorite. I only jump in for IFS because it's the underdog that never gets any love, and it does not hurt that the stong points of IFS are a significant part of my choice of current vehicle, though I've owned and been very fond of Dodges and Fords (to a lesser extent) in the past, and have 2 SFA 1 ton (axles anyway) 4x4s currently. The 2 SFAs are both GM but have Ford and Dodge parts on them too! So I'm very much not prejudiced one way or the other in spite of the fact I'm usually arguing the same side.

Hehe, absolutely right on the snow plow. My guess is that it's mostly a mater of spring rate. I've seen some guys using Timbrens(sp?) to carry a plow though... I'll give that point to the SFA crowd though. The solid axles are much better for taking that kind of pounding (500 some odd pounds hanging off the front).


Bobby:

I was trying to get at a point without being too blunt. Let me try again...

IMO (and strongly held) your stated observation is worth absolutely nothing. You are comparing 2 completely different beasts and your observation is worth exactly the same as someone declaratively stating that they drove a Corvette and a Town Car on the same road and noted that the Corvette felt more stabile and handled better. The 2 vehicles are totally different on all levels and would feel different even if you drove an older 2WD Sub or a SFA 4x4 Sub. And with all those differences there is NO way to tell what the IFS is or is not contributing. IFS is not some magic feature that makes a bumbling ‘Burb into a Vette, but if you drove a SFA burb back to back with the IFS, it would at least be MUCH closer. If you drove my truck and yours back to back on the same twisty and rough road, you may still feel the same way and make the same statement, and at least you would be comparing from the same class of vehicle. Then again, look how many people swear by the “Tornado” thingys and K&N filters… :D

Oh, and one last point Bobby, notice the forum this is in? If you don't want to debate and/or argue on this point, maybe you should avoid starting the discussion? Because you know very well that if I'm not distracted, I can't pass up a good debate... :poke:

So what you're saying is that my SFA Ram is like a vette and the burb with cheesy IFS is like grandma's town car?:D :D :D

rotfl LOL, only you would make that leap...

Hey, I'm just repeating what you said....:popcorn: :D

So what you're saying is that my SFA Ram is like a vette

So you still wish you had a bought Chevy!!rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl

I don't know if anybody has mentioned this yet or not, but a lot of the "wallowing" that some GM IFS rigs have is caused by the shoddy GM shocks. They just plain suck. You get a much more stable ride when you switch out for an aftermarket shock, such as Bilstiens. The truck feels much firmer and tighter when you are cornering.

So you still wish you had a bought Chevy!!rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl rotfl


Thats not possible since I never wanted a Chevy pickup in the first place.;)

I don't know if anybody has mentioned this yet or not, but a lot of the "wallowing" that some GM IFS rigs have is caused by the shoddy GM shocks. They just plain suck. You get a much more stable ride when you switch out for an aftermarket shock, such as Bilstiens. The truck feels much firmer and tighter when you are cornering.

I think the shocks cancel themselves out, since Dodge and Ford don't exactly use the best quality shocks either.

Can’t argue with your statements on IFS except that in this application it would appear GM’s IFS is not up to the task (or their frames are not) since you can’t hang a snow plow on a Dmax.

Says who?? You cant get a DMAX with the plow prep pkg b/c they already have all of the components needed...i.e. HD alternator, HD Torsion bars, dual batterys etc

I am pretty sure that this is a common misconception however I could be wrong!! Check out plowsite.com there are lots of guys running plows on Dmax's

As I recall, the problem is not the equpment, but that the front axle weight rating is too low for any but the smallest/lightest of plows. Of course, some mount them anyway, but the front suspension was too soft and sagged too much, so they added the Tembrins (or however they are spelled).

Yeah, as long as you put Timbrens and stiffer shocks on, a Duramax can handle the plow fine. That problem is only with the 3500 crew cabs. The 2500HD and 3500 gas can take a plow with no extra trouble.
There is also a thread about this on www.letstalksnow.com (http://www.letstalksnow.com).

Looks like GM’s front axle weight rating (GAWR) is only 4670 lbs on the 2500 and 4800 lbs on the 3500. Dodge is 5200 lbs for both 3/4 and 1 tons and Ford is a whopping 6000 lbs for both. Don’t know what the unloaded front weights with the diesels are, but it’s a safe bet that for the highest snow plow weight carrying capacity, Ford wins.

Pickups have been used to plow snow forever. To buy a new truck and have to prop up the front suspension with aftermarket parts is lame. GM could have done the Timberns too, but I suspect there are other weak links in the suspension besides just the springs. GM decided to forsake the diesel plow truck market in favor of plush grocery getters, thats a shame.

But go ahead, mount that v plow on a new $40K+ Dmax , pull into a GM dealer riding on the bump stops and then ask for a warranty repair of a cv joint, ball joint, unit bearing or some other damaged front end part. Let us know what happens.:poke:

I honestly think a Dmax could probably hold up a snow plow just fine. I have seen multiple K5 Blazers with snow plows hanging off the front of them. Granted, a K5 has a solid front axle, but it's also a half ton.

But go ahead, mount that v plow on a new $40K+ Dmax , pull into a GM dealer riding on the bump stops and then ask for a warranty repair of a cv joint, ball joint, unit bearing or some other damaged front end part. Let us know what happens.

Not if you have the plow prep package.....:poke:. Even if it has bumpstops, they can't deny service.

I honestly think a Dmax could probably hold up a snow plow just fine. I have seen multiple K5 Blazers with snow plows hanging off the front of them. Granted, a K5 has a solid front axle, but it's also a half ton.

waytogo I agree. Heck, there are even S-10 running around with plows. And not just those snowsports. They have real plows!

Pickups have been used to plow snow forever. To buy a new truck and have to prop up the front suspension with aftermarket parts is lame. GM could have done the Timberns too, but I suspect there are other weak links in the suspension besides just the springs. GM decided to forsake the diesel plow truck market in favor of plush grocery getters, thats a shame.

See, I don't understand this thinking either. Out of all the 4x4s sold, how many mount plows? Way, WAY less that 1% would be my guess. So everyone should take the more harsh ride just so a few can mount a plow on a stock truck? Of course they could have added something like Timbrens to the "plow option" if they offered one, but then again, as mentioned, it would be a warranty issue when things break. I can certainly see GM management discussing the value of lost sales due to no plow option vs. the cost of warranty issues (and more parts to support, options to track, stock to maintain, etc.) that would result, and deciding it's not worth fooling with. The fact that many people do plow with the GMs, and I've seen no problems reported other than the need for the timbrens, seems to indicate that the GM is not deficient in this category other than lacking a factory "plow prep" package.

bigHD, snow plow prep is not an option with the Dmax.

I’ve seen plows on Subarus, an AMC Eagle and I even tried to mount one to a bicycle as a kid, so what does that have to do with the Dmax? BTW my current plow truck is a K5 (with a D60 front axle and custom plow mount). I get away with it, but I have seen a couple stock of K5s with frame damage where the plow mounted to the truck frame. Though, none of this is relevant to the Dmax. Any truck can be overloaded and survive..... for a while.

Thanks Baddog, you made my argument for me, though I’m not sure why everyone would have to suffer, that is what an "option" or "option package" is for. I do agree with your assessment that Gm figured it wasn’t worth the risk of warranty claims. That assessment supports the theory that the front axle or frame or whatever would be over stressed with the installation of a heavy plow.

Bottom line is: GM has the weakest front axle of the big three. So unless someone can show that GM uses a larger safety factor when calculating GAWR, it is an issue for a plow truck. It might be an issue for the slide in camper crowd too, I don’t know. I do agree that it is a non-issue for most diesel owners and all the gassers.

The deficiency is that GM engineering feels their top of the line "heavy duty" pickup truck is not strong enough for a plow and the Dmax. That was good enough for me to switch brands. Doesn’t mean the GM with the Dmax is a bad truck, just not the best on the planet as many tend to preach.

It was an option. I thought the only truck you couldn't get it on was the 3500. If so I stand corrected.waytogo

I guess the S-10 deal didnt have a lot to do with the Duramax.:doah: But I was just making a point. I thought this was going to turn into "oh IFS is so weak...blah,blah,blah" thing.

No harm, no foul!waytogo

Brods:

I was making 2 points.

First, that to effectively support that super heavy nose niche market (plows) would likely have impacted everyone to some extent just in the supporting design, option or not. This might be extra cost for a different (heavier) frame that most don't need, or compromises in the basic suspension that otherwise works fantastic (IMO) for a 4x4 tow rig that sees 99%+ street duty.

The second point was the "option" option. ;) Again, this would be less effective without the other supporting elements in the base design, AND particularly without those elements in place, presents and unacceptable risk to GM. They certainly could have supported the plow market, but I for one am glad that they did not force me to pay extra for the extra beef and potentially compromise MY use so that they could support a niche market.

In short, if they could support any niche without extra cost or involvement, I’m sure they would as they would not be so foolish as to close a door on potential buyers without reason. And given the extensive engineering, revision, and review of producing the current HD line, I’m also sure it was not a “oh crap, we can’t carry a plow” last minute revelation. Which all combined is why I say that the required compromise/cost should not have been imposed on the rest of us… You guys have plenty of other options, nobody says GM has to play on every field, and I for one am glad they don’t…

In any case, you’re not going to get an argument from me on your general point. GM has a target customer, and that does not include everyone. If you plow, or want to lift and run big tires (for poser status or real off-road), and I'm sure in other things I can't think of right now; then you probably shouldn't be looking at a GM at all. However, for a large number of people, the GM design is superior. To each their own, according to their needs...

I think you are over exaggerating the effect of increasing the strength of the front end. They could easily have beefed it up without much, if any, noticeable effect for the non-plow optioned trucks. Its not like they would hang an extra 1,000 lbs of steel on the front at a cost of hundreds of dollars while destroying the glorious IFS ride in the process.... the current front ends or the GM designers aren’t that weak, are they?:poke:

If the truck was a brand new, clean sheet design and they didn’t offer the Dmax with the capacity to accept a plow, then I’d agree it was intentional. Since the truck design has been around for awhile (since 1988?), I seriously doubt they had made a deliberate decision to forgo the diesel plow market right from the start. More likely they backed themselves into a corner using existing parts, where, as you say, the cost to get out was not worth expected the benefit. If you have factual information to the contrary, please do share it.

As for cost impact, every truck currently has many items engineered into the truck for a "niche" market segment that cost precious extra pennies to manufacture (like the ability of the tcase to accept a pto). A stronger front end would cost very little per truck and would arguably be of more value to most buyers than the capability to mount a pto or other "niche" market items.

Maybe you think GM’s design is at its peak and shouldn’t change. I welcome the constant improvement by manufacturers in an attempt to out do the competition and cover as many of the market segments as possible. All of todays trucks would not be as good as they are without that competition. I’ll even buy ya a beer, if after the next major mechanical redesign, like switching to coils, GM still does not approve of a plow with the Dmax Crew. I hope they do and would consider buying Chevy trucks again if they also made them look more like the 2002 model year!

BTW the Detroit Free Press said market analysts have downgraded their outlook for Ford because they think the GM redesign will take market share away from the F series pickups. Anybody have some news on the new 2500 and 3500 mechanicals?

I’m not exaggerating anything. It would take extra work, not only for (I’m guessing) frame upgrades, suspension component upgrades, and making other changes (electrical? Mounting points? ???) so that an official, supported (and warranted) “plow option” would be supported.

And I really don’t know for sure, but as I understand it, the ’01 was pretty much a new design. <shrug> I could easily be wrong, but I lack enough interest to pursue that, so I’ll leave it to someone more motivated to provide proof or references one way or the other. <shrug>

And yes, every manufacturer HAS chosen some set of niche markets to support, and some not to support. Each has market areas they have “passed on”; GM with the plows, Dodge with working crews or CCs, or Ford with a dependable diesel (sorry couldn’t resist :D ). But *by definition* niche markets are very narrow and do not have wide appeal. I do not find it hard to believe that any manufacturer might decide that some niche is “saturated” and determine that it is not worth their entry, or even to stay where they once were. If the market is saturated, then ANY investment in that area is not worth while unless you can amortize it across ALL sales without loosing ground. And GM already has the highest price truck going, so what would you suggest they do?

As for GM at it’s peak, oh dear god I hope not. I think that they, like all the rest have more areas that they can improve than areas they get “right”. And each time they gain ground in one area, they loose it in another (particularly body style IMO), so it’s been more or less stagnant for MANY years, unless you only consider specific functionality so that someone can say things like “GM just sucks after 86/91 because they went IFS” or to make some other equally narrow minded assertion.

In any case, I do fully agree that competition is a great thing and is the only thing keeping these mega companies from sliding back into the downward spiral dark ages of the 80s. And I also agree that I would like to see them bring back the look of the ’01-’02 trucks, as well as that they should make these trucks better and more capable in all ways, as long as the price doesn’t continue to escalate (seemingly without limit). My beef is not with people wanting them to support plows, or wanting them to support SFA, or whatever. My beef is with people who feel compelled to label anything that does not seem custom tailored for their needs (plow, SFA, or otherwise) as inferior. Going back to your earlier post on the subject, I think we are in complete agreement at the point of saying “It is a matter or priorities, each has their strengths and weaknesses, pros and cons, and the “best” is determined by a persons needs, not by loyalty or some popularity contest.

Ahh, I love a good debate. But I would like the opportunity to argue the other side once in a while. Maybe I should go off to one of the brand loyal GM tow rig sites for a while just for a change of pace. But then I would just get banned or harassed for “being a troll” or “stirring up trouble”… ;) So I guess I’ll just hang here and fend off the angry hordes of Ford and Dodge fanatics, forever jealous and unhappy that they didn’t get a GM, all doing their best in a futile effort to self justify that mistake… :stir: :pimp:

hey, i didnt know that dodge 2wd trucks had ifs! at least thats what I read over at cummins forums.:confused:

They sure are, have been for decades.

So I guess I’ll just hang here and fend off the angry hordes of Ford and Dodge fanatics, forever jealous and unhappy that they didn’t get a GM, all doing their best in a futile effort to self justify that mistake… :stir: :pimp:
My first vehicle was a GM product, rest assured I didn't make the same mistake twice.:D

My first vehicle was a GM product, rest assured I didn't make the same mistake twice.:D

Nope, made an even bigger mistake!!!:D Only thing you could have done worse was buy a Ford!!!:stir:

well your chevy must be better because it can pull to 12000 lbs.
now thats a lot rotfl with 650 lbs of torque you think it could do better:stir:

but then it is a chevy:D

the best truck is the one that you are willing to pay $45000.00 or so for
and then be happy about it:D

I'll keep driving my Cummins powered 6 speed Dodge Semi ( SHHHH don't tell her she isn't!!!). Well as long as my back and nees hold up.waytogo

Then I might down grade to a smoooth riding GMC Duramax to pull a 5th wheel.

Or I will get a Cummins Powered Diesel pusher RV.

Wish they would put a Cummins in the Chevy though not really a Dodge fan but I love that Cummins always been a Chevy guy myself.

Oh yeah and a SFA. I had a IFS 4x4 pick-up and after dropping about 1500 in the front end it still wouldn't hold up to actually turning the 4wd on. Granted it was a mini truck but I wasn't abusing it, I drove it to work everyday. I used the 4wd drive about 5-6 days a week going hunting and fishing. The steering was a weak link as was the upper control arm mounts and the torsion bars. I actually broke the upper control arm link by hitting a small pot hole ( I mean like maybe 3 inches deep pot hole) then I ripped the splines out of the torsion bar mounts by hitting a dip at about 15MPH. IMO IFS sucks and should not really be on a full size 3/4 or 1 ton truck.

I think the Allison is by far the best auto you can get,

Lets see where this goes!!! :popcorn:[/quote]............ lets do a science experiment kids when you get home today take apart your Allison trany and look at what all the parts say inside of them ..... heres a hint they are not allison trany parts

:popcorn:............ lets do a science experiment kids when you get home today take apart your Allison trany and look at what all the parts say inside of them ..... heres a hint they are not allison trany parts[/quote]

Sorry but this is not true. The Allison 1000 is a true ALLISON transmission. If it were not a true ALLSION transmission, GM coulnt put that little badge on the door that said Allison. Allison makes the tranny, then ships it to GM. Same as the Cummins in the Dodges. Cummins makes the engine and ships it to dodge. Its like saying if you tear into your enigne that there wont be Cummins parts. Sorry man but this rumor first started when the Duramax first came. It wasnt true then, its not true now!!!

[quote=DMAXRIG
Sorry but this is not true. The Allison 1000 is a true ALLISON transmission. If it were not a true ALLSION transmission, GM coulnt put that little badge on the door that said Allison. [/quote]

Actually, no. GM could put an Allison badge on the side of an Aveo if they wanted to, since they own Allison, last time I heard. I've heard both arguments, that the 1000 series is a GM trans and a borrowed badge plate, and the GM guys standing behind it saying it's strait from Allison.... blah blah..

It all doesn't matter. Why? Because it still isn't that wonderfull of a transmission, and a nameplate doesn't make it even better. Just as a Cummins nameplate on the side of a Dodge doesn't make it pull the hill faster, as some Dodge guys like to think.

The 1000 series still can't handle all that much more power over stock than a 48RE and Torqueshift. It does have a better shifting setup, as that extra gear helps, but it's not gods gift to mankind. Outside of an extra gear it's nearly identical to the other two brands.