Home Forums Gear Hunting Trucks and Four-Wheel Drives Late Model Diesel Truck Comparison

Anybody have thoughts on 2011 or younger diesel trucks? I've got a 1997 Dodge Cummins that I love. However, it's not very comfortable on long trips with the wife and dog. Considering buying a good used model. I'll certainly keep my Dodge.

I like the new diesels made by GMC/Chevy, Ford, and Dodge. What I'm looking for is experience and advice regarding performance and maintenance comparisons.

Thanks.

Dibs if you sell your 97

I drove one of the newer Chevy's and found them to be far more comfortable than my 2007 Cummins.

if hutsonora backs out, i'll take it

I have a 2011 Dodge 2500 Cummins. It's still a solid front axle, so it doesn't exactly ride like a Cadillac, but the fit and finish seem superior to older Dodges, and we find it pretty comfortable for travel especially with a trailer on the back or with the tires aired down to the "light" setting. I haven't ridden in one to compare, but I would think that an IFS Chevy is going to give you a bit more in the comfort factor department when it comes to ride.

Performance has been all I was looking for, however I'm not pulling max loads -- a 30 foot TT weighing probably 7,500 all up. Mine is not the HO version and seems like plenty. The new auto transmission is pretty smooth. Six speeds is good. The engine brake rocks coming down the hill with a trailer on the back.

It had one issue at first. They had to come up with some new programming for higher altitude use and until they did that under warranty, the mileage simply sucked and the check engine light kept coming on. It's two years old and has just over 30,000 miles and the gas mileage has crept up to just about respectable for an emissions impaired new truck. I get 11 to 12 towing through the mountains, 15 around town, and upwards of 18 empty from Denver to Grand Junction. That is measured. The computer reads anywhere from .5 mpg low to 1.5 mpg high of actual, generally high.

Maintenance has been minimal. Just following the schedule and there isn't a whole lot to it at this point. Fuel filters every 15K are an easy fifteen minute job. Oil changes as indicated by the computer were pretty frequent at first (2,500 to 3,000 miles), but have stretched out now to where I didn't wait for it to come on for the last one.

Haven't had a Chevy or Ford diesel to compare to, but so far so good with this Dodge. Like that there is no urea to deal with.

Does the new Cummins require DEF yet? I've heard it's coming. DEF is nothing but 2/3 water and 1/3 urea fertilizer but they sure don't price it that way.

2013 Dodges require DEF. 2010-2012 don't.

I own a 2003 Duramax that I am very happy with. If I were to buy a diesel now, I'd look for a pre-DEF without question. You may be able to find the last of a new 2012 Dodge still, if you're lucky.

In the used market, my knowledge is limited, but if it were me I would stay away from Ford 6.0 engines, even though my understanding is they can be "bulletproofed" with some aftermarket work.

2006 and earlier Duramax's don't require Urea and perform well and ride well. They sell for a premium if low mileage. A 2006 Dodge isn't too shabby either. A low mileage one will sell for nearly what it cost new.

I'd actually prefer the urea motor over the pre-DEF ones. The ones without DEF have to have their tuning screwed with so much to make the emissions regulations that they get poor fuel economy as a result. The DEF motors do better because they can adjust the tuning for better economy and still meet emissions standards. DEF is pretty cheap if you buy it at the right places.

This.

I've got a bone-stock '11 Crew, short-bx, 4x4, F-250 6.7L, 3:31. I don't really drive it around town so couldn't say what that mileage is. I recently pulled a 24' flatbed 1200mi. 600Mi empty, 600 W/a Honda Accord aboard. I ran ~80MPH the whole trip and averaged 11MPG.

Interstate system here is 75MPH so most run ~80ish.

@ ~73-75MPH with my ~3K# boat in tow I get 11-12MPG.

@ ~80MPH with just the truck I get 15-16MPG.

@ ~70MPH with just the truck I get 17-19 depending on the wind.

Fuel, oil, air, and oil filters is all I've done so far. I bought it new <100mi on it and I'm creeping up on 28K now. It's comfortable to drive and ride in, nice and quiet going down the road. DEF has been a non-issue for me despite living in ND. I keep a 2.5Gal jug @ home and make sure I'm full before any long trips and let the dealer top it off any time I get the oil changed. I was really hoping the mileage would be 2-3MPG better than it is, but 20MPG @ 80MPH isn't 3/4 pickup territory I guess. If I had any real issue it's that the fuel tank is only 26Gal due to the DEF eating up 5gal of capacity.

Thanks, guys. Not too worried about the ride, mainly the comfort of the cab. Sorry, I should have said that up front. My '97 rides very hard, though better than my '92, so that won't make any real difference to us.

I have ridden in a new Dodge and GMC/Chevy. Really liked the seats and cab of the GMC and Chevy. They seemed to ride smoother than the Dodge, but not by much.

Horse, isn't the DEF stored in a separate tank?

You are off by 5 yrs.

DPF was added in 2007.5 (LMM).
DEF (urea) was added in 2011 (LML).

That makes little sense.

Its the DPF that kills fuel economy, not DEF.

A diesel can have a DPF and no DEF but not the other way around.

I hope Chevy relocated their DEF tank. Last year we looked at a 3/4 ton 4 door long bed. They had the tank hanging 4" below the frame right behind the right front tire. There's no way it could survive even limited off road driving. A service man just happened to be standing there & he said they were staying busy installing aftermarket shields to protect them.

You either need your eyes checked or a new tape measure. The DEF tank is essentially flush with the frame.

99% of the population wouldn't take their CC long bed truck the places I take mine during deer and elk season. Its funny how the DEF tank has survived just fine.

The one we looked at was a '12. They were getting all kinds of complaints so they probably raised it for '13.

No, it's not. The DPF adds some restriction, but it's not the primary cause of poor fuel mileage in the non-DEF trucks.

DEF is used to lower the amount of Nitrogen Oxides in the exhaust. Whether or not to use DEF is up to the manufacturer, but they all still all have to meet the same standards for NOX emissions. If they choose to use DEF like Ford and Chevy in 2012 then they can tune the engine for better fuel economy and still have it meet emissions regulations. Dodge in 2012 chose to not use DEF and they were able to meet emissions without it. However, that comes at a cost which is that they had to tune the injection sequence timing in a way that wasn't optimum for fuel economy but which gave them the reduced NOX emissions that the EPA required. Going to DEF in 2013 allowed them to better optimize the programming. In other words, you can get by without the DEF but you have to burn more fuel to make the engine meet the emissions standards. If the manufacturers were free of the EPA then they wouldn't use either diesel particle filters or diesel exhaust fluid and they could give us motors that got great fuel mileage. However, that's not reality and to get a non-DEF motor to meet emissions you have to feed it more fuel than a DEF motor, thus the worse fuel mileage out of the non-DEF motor.

DPF reduces fuel mileage by 4-5 mpg. The DPF uses fuel every 350-400 miles to clean out the filter resulting in high EGTs.

Trucks with DEF have a high rate to reoccurring issues. It is a flawed system. Adding a 9th injector did little to help the emission issues.

If you want to talk about tuning, school us on EFIlive :-)