WTF are you talking about GM was looking at CAT for their new diesel along with Isuzu...Are you seriously calling BS on that? Whatever I'm glad your the expert on all things CAT. Thats not a bad thing...
Well, considering GM owns roughly half of the company that builds the Dmax, even if I didn't work where I do, I would find it hard to believe that GM would look elsewhere for an engine supplier for their light trucks. If you really read this in the WSJ, surely I would be able to find some info in an internet search if it is public record, but alas, I found nothing. I think YOU need to stop spreading rumors about things you have no inside information about.
That isn't neccessarely a bad thing. Freightliner is also owned by Mercedes and are putting their engines in a lot of new trucks and are very good engines. I would welcome the entry of a new diesel engine in a LD pickup, as long as it is an inline 6, not ANOTHER darned diesel V8.
I find it funny that everything you post on a forum is taken with such scutiny...I've researched and read numerous sources of information and when I mention something it would be nice if folks would just take it with a grain of salt, look it up themselves if they question it and stop being so un-friendly. With that here is some info on GM looking at CAT as well as others before they settled on the Isuzu Duramax...which is all I said originally because I came across this info years ago because I was curious what GM was going to do when the 6.2L came to an end. At 08:35 AM 4/20/05 -0600, Randy wrote: Jim, >When GM was trying to find a new Diesel engine for their light duty >trucks weren't they looking/working with CAT to see about developing a >new engine? Obviously they went with Isuzu and the Duramax was born >but in the late 90 I thought I had read that they were somewhat close >to signing with CAT to produce the engines. Do you know of any >articles anywhere talking about this? > >Regards, >Randy >Denver, Colorado Hi Randy, GM entertained several diesel engine manufacturers - including Caterpillar, John Deere, and others. One of our members actually saw a 3500 series GM truck with a yellow Cat engine under the hood at the Catepillar plant - sitting in their R&D department. The rest, as they say, is history... Jim TheDieselPage.com Jim Bigley 418 Grandview Drive Stevensville, MT 59870 http://www.TheDieselPage.com https://www.maximumdiesel.com/form.htm (Secure Online Application) turbo@TheDieselPage.com
I am sure he did see a truck with a yellow engine in it. I work with some of the guys that installed an engine in that truck or one just like it. Just because GM put a feeler out to several companies wanting them to fit up an engine into a truck, is far from that company developing an engine for them. The 3126 would have never been viable in a light truck, and to say that Cat was "developing" an engine for GM is ridiculous unless you sat in on a meeting where Cat decided to develop engines for GM. It isn't just something the executives decide on a whim. Did you really see this in the WSJ or did you make that up to add credibility to your claims? Were the other companies "developing" enignes for GM? I doubt there were 3 or 4 companies simultaneously "developing" engines for one company. Maybe the problem is your definition of development of a diesel engine is much more lax than mine. Developing to me means taking a new or existing engine, and putting millions into developing hardware and software sets to give the OEM and customer exactly what they want and having a contract to build the engines for that truck. AFAIK, Cat never did any of this, they simply put an engine into a truck to see if GM would go for one of our engines so they may get a contract to supply them. And no, I will not just take what people say with a grain of salt and leave it alone. When I see misinformation spread, I try my best to correct it. Your knowledge in this case is thirdhand at best, so maybe you shouldn't be making claims with that shaky of a basis in the first place
I'd like to see one of the big three use John Deere for their diesel option. From my experience, John Deere has some of the best engines with the simplest designs out there. I have had great luck with their engines. I have even thought about swapping in an inline 6 JD engine I have into my F600 service truck that has a worthless 370 V8.
Semantics...You must really hate Caterpillar. :doah: So GM was just letting CAT install their engine in a C/K truck for the hell of it? Ok... I can see what I posted is as clear as the light of day and ultimately I don't think it was a load of BS at all as others can attest. What you are suggesting is that I seemed to just make this up and CAT was never even considered as an engine source to replace the 6.2L. How could you miss seeing the C/K truck with the CAT engine in it? I'm sure you can find someone who works with you that saw this. In any event it occured and I don't think the consideration of CAT was BS...It's too bad they didn't have a similiar engine like the ISB Cummins Series already in place. It would be nice if you were a little more civil instead of such a hard ass. You'll never change so have a good one. :stir:
Hmm, my paycheck says Caterpillar, I love my job, but I must really hate Caterpillar, nice logic. You think Cat needs permission to buy a GM truck and put an engine in it? The answer is no. Did you not even read my last post? You didn't say at first that GM considered a Cat, you said Cat was developing an engine for GM, these are two totally different things which I already explained in the last post. It would be nice if you tried to keep your posts factual, especially about a company I work for.
There was a pole on one of the other Dodge Web Sites a couple years ago that indicated most of the repondence would follow the Cummins. Preferance at that time was towards a Ford. Serveral things affected the response including Dodges lack of a true crew cab, the problems surronding the second generation trucks with the OEM electric fuel pump and, problems with the VP44 rotary injection pump following failure of the electric fuel pump. Its taken Dodge until this model year to resolve the electric fuel pump issue putting it in the fuel tank instead of mounting it on the engine were it was thought heat was the problem. Being in the tank would keep it cooler. Thats still to be seen with the 06's. Gone is the Rotary injection pump in 03 to the common rail system. The bullet proof P-7100 in line injection pump still lerks looking for another home. I would perfer the 7100 to the common rail system. I personally think most of the problems with the VP44 Rotary Injection Pump could be atributed to installation of performance related timing boxes and the failure of the electric fuel pumps. I think we'll see a Mega Cab with an 8ft bed, dual rear wheels with fender skirts that flow with the truck instead of sticking out like some afterthought. We may also see the end of the Quad Cab favoring a standard type crew cab dually. I also think you might see a bigger cummins in the future. Keep in mind that the little ole 5.9 can make 700-750 ftlbs of torque tomorrow morning without creating a problem for the engine down the road. Chevy and Ford both are trying to pump up their engines with more torque. Chevy enlarged the bottom end on the d-max with the torque increase. Ford still needs to get the bugs out of the 6.0. Twin turbos that are not computer controled may help. (expensive engine and you can't see it under the hood) The differance in the size of the Cummins connecting rods compared with the D-Max and PS is unbelievalbe. Thats why Cummins can make the torque if it needs to. I will try and post a picture of the connecting rods in the photo gallery. I also thing Cummins will stay with Dodge in the USA. Dave
