Just drove a 6.7L/68RE and 07 6.6L Dmax
04-02-2007, 05:44 PM
#31
Chapter President
To be honest, I have drove all three, and I think (and not just cause I bought one) the duramax is still the quickest stock truck. They are allmost a 1000lbs lighter, more hp. But holy schlamoly,,, I just got home from Edmonton with this new duramax,, in my 03 even all modded I can make the trip in less than half a tank, approx, 40 liters... I drove the duramax back home today,,, couldnt even make it home, had to fill up,, 90 litres, now I realize it has to break in,, but holy
Kevin
Kevin
Don't you love that MASSIVE fuel cell??? Wonder why the curb weight is lower, it only holds a few gallons of fuel.. Must have a lot of fuel stops close to the home of the design team... Oh and if the mileage on my buddies LB7 is any indicator, what you get new is what you get with 180,000 Km on the dial. Get used to it..
$4K buys alot of fuel I guess, but I got better things to do than stand at the fuel hose.....
04-02-2007, 07:58 PM
#32
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
6.4 L ford - mine - I actually own one - not just flappin my face.
No turbo lag at all, I have 3500 km on mine and its getting stronger every day. Also no flame out the back - Dam.
The 3500 - 6.7 L if you do a build & price - single wheel 4x4 lists the hp @ 325 & 610 torque.
The few I have drove sure are not rockets or should they be.
To me the duramax new - seem to be the quikest, ford 2nd Ram last
And I m a Ford - Ram lover.
I have owned 5 diesel Rams since 05 - 2 - F350 power strokes
I buy the Ford for work & better interior - motor & drive train wise there close - ford definatly had the better auto - maybe still.
The only one that has broke down on me was 05 12 valve - tranny, 03 common rail - fuel pump, clutch.
My dealer had to buy back a 6.7 L 07 cab & chasis truck - could not keep it running - there at a loss for what is wrong with it. Cant start a grass fire because it wont run long enough
No turbo lag at all, I have 3500 km on mine and its getting stronger every day. Also no flame out the back - Dam.
The 3500 - 6.7 L if you do a build & price - single wheel 4x4 lists the hp @ 325 & 610 torque.
The few I have drove sure are not rockets or should they be.
To me the duramax new - seem to be the quikest, ford 2nd Ram last
And I m a Ford - Ram lover.
I have owned 5 diesel Rams since 05 - 2 - F350 power strokes
I buy the Ford for work & better interior - motor & drive train wise there close - ford definatly had the better auto - maybe still.
The only one that has broke down on me was 05 12 valve - tranny, 03 common rail - fuel pump, clutch.
My dealer had to buy back a 6.7 L 07 cab & chasis truck - could not keep it running - there at a loss for what is wrong with it. Cant start a grass fire because it wont run long enough
- against a 4x4 3500 6.7 L - Let me know - Turbo lag my azz!
04-02-2007, 08:36 PM
#34
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Alberta
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RadRam, maybe you drove the wrong truck because those HP/TQ numbers are wrong... that's the 5.9L's rating.
The 6.7L is rated at 350hp and 650tq with the new 6 speed auto and 350hp and 610tq with the manual.
Maybe the two 08 Superdutys I drove were duds, but I think they would have got roasted by both the 6.7 and 6.6, especially right out of the hole.
The 6.7L is rated at 350hp and 650tq with the new 6 speed auto and 350hp and 610tq with the manual.
Maybe the two 08 Superdutys I drove were duds, but I think they would have got roasted by both the 6.7 and 6.6, especially right out of the hole.
04-02-2007, 08:41 PM
#35
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: South Indy
Posts: 1,370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it me, or am I the only one having a hard time reading RedRam posts?
From what I have read the 6.4 is not near as quick as many have expected it would be. Read that a couple ran 16 second quarter mile times. I have yet to make it to the dealerships to do my own tests. Maybe I can do that this weekend and offer up my reviews.
From what I have read the 6.4 is not near as quick as many have expected it would be. Read that a couple ran 16 second quarter mile times. I have yet to make it to the dealerships to do my own tests. Maybe I can do that this weekend and offer up my reviews.
04-02-2007, 08:53 PM
#36
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know I drove 07 6 spd autos, 3500 4x4 6.7 L cummins, thats what the dodge site lists for power - I could be pushing the wrong buttons
They are nice trucks still dealing on one for the wife - dont ask me why.
I will say this - my 06 F350 8" lift with an SCT Tow toon - is close to about the same power as my stock 08 6.6 L - its getting amazingly stronger every day - fuel milage - maybe 14 - 15 mpg max - not great. I was a little concerned about the power at the start.Maybe thats all the 6.7 L cummins needs is a few Kms.
Once I pick up the 07 6.7 L - I will see how the two compare - Im still a cummins fan - I like both. Dodge needs a special edition.
By the way I dont think a lifted mega cab can be beat for looks - thats my next project.
They are nice trucks still dealing on one for the wife - dont ask me why.
I will say this - my 06 F350 8" lift with an SCT Tow toon - is close to about the same power as my stock 08 6.6 L - its getting amazingly stronger every day - fuel milage - maybe 14 - 15 mpg max - not great. I was a little concerned about the power at the start.Maybe thats all the 6.7 L cummins needs is a few Kms.
Once I pick up the 07 6.7 L - I will see how the two compare - Im still a cummins fan - I like both. Dodge needs a special edition.
By the way I dont think a lifted mega cab can be beat for looks - thats my next project.
04-03-2007, 12:19 AM
#38
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Fort McMurray, Alberta
Posts: 5,426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you referring to the cloth or leather seats? The 07 I drove had leather Sport seats and I thought they were decent, not as nice as the Laramie seats though.
And did you get to drive the new style GM at all? What did you think of it? I can't get over the interior, I loved the new Nav and other gadgets and all the panels actually fit together now lol.
On a side note, my friend ended up factory ordering an 07 GMC 2500 4x4... I think it came out to $75k CDN on the sticker and $67k out the door. His final reasoning was that he liked the interior better and needs a GM to pull his 68 Camaro around lol. Now I have to buy a Dodge so we don't have the same trucks.
And did you get to drive the new style GM at all? What did you think of it? I can't get over the interior, I loved the new Nav and other gadgets and all the panels actually fit together now lol.
On a side note, my friend ended up factory ordering an 07 GMC 2500 4x4... I think it came out to $75k CDN on the sticker and $67k out the door. His final reasoning was that he liked the interior better and needs a GM to pull his 68 Camaro around lol. Now I have to buy a Dodge so we don't have the same trucks.
I drove a larimie, all leather, top of the line. Those seats SUCK. Worst seats I have ever drove on. My 03 all bagged out is still nicer than those ones. I looked at the new chevy, couldnt get over the outside and how ugly it is. Dont know what your buddy was buying, but my truck has all the toys other than the rear seat dvd (1680 cdn) listed at 63480, picked it up for 56k, and 0% interest, also got the dealership to give me running boards at half price, and throw in mudflaps, and give me everything else at cost.
Kevin
04-03-2007, 12:20 AM
#39
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Fort McMurray, Alberta
Posts: 5,426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally, as far as power goes, that new dodge is darn close to the duramax, I was much more impressed with the new 6.7 than the 6.4 ford. I found that the 6.4 performed much closer to the 6.0 than I would have thought. I also was able to get the 6.7 to spin the tires off the line
Kevin
Kevin
04-03-2007, 11:09 AM
#40
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 442
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Second, hook 15k on behind and tell me which is quickest.
Third, I didn't know Dodge had an 05 12 valve??
04-03-2007, 02:16 PM
#41
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Alberta
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I drove a larimie, all leather, top of the line. Those seats SUCK. Worst seats I have ever drove on. My 03 all bagged out is still nicer than those ones. I looked at the new chevy, couldnt get over the outside and how ugly it is. Dont know what your buddy was buying, but my truck has all the toys other than the rear seat dvd (1680 cdn) listed at 63480, picked it up for 56k, and 0% interest, also got the dealership to give me running boards at half price, and throw in mudflaps, and give me everything else at cost.
Kevin
Kevin
And as for the price, I think you ended up with one of these right? They are discounting them a lot to get them out the door, what you were quoted is pretty much the same as him.
Well he got the all new GMT900 style, in the GMC Sierra. The sticker on them is freakin crazy. Nav is like a $4k option:
04-03-2007, 03:25 PM
#43
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And as for the price, I think you ended up with one of these right? They are discounting them a lot to get them out the door, what you were quoted is pretty much the same as him.
Well he got the all new GMT900 style, in the GMC Sierra. The sticker on them is freakin crazy. Nav is like a $4k option:
Well he got the all new GMT900 style, in the GMC Sierra. The sticker on them is freakin crazy. Nav is like a $4k option:
The GMC site wouldn't let me grab the image, but it's not too different from the one posted above.
04-03-2007, 05:25 PM
#44
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Fort McMurray, Alberta
Posts: 5,426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah I sure dont like the new chevy,, interior is nice, but,,, man it is ugly. The 06 seats are different than the 07 IMO. I drove an 06, and was expecting those seats, seeing as they look the same,, but they are not. And I think that with 5.9% 4000 grand more in price, I dont think I could burn enough fuel to make that up.. besides, I still have my 03 when I feel the need for a real truck'
Kevin
Kevin
04-04-2007, 02:22 PM
#45
Banned
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Pike Road, Alabama
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well you start out telling your little brother that your hotwheels car will beat his. And later you grow up and buy a Dodge Cummins. If you forget to grow up, you buy a DMax. If you forget to grow up and smoke a lot of pot and crack along the way, then you buy a 6.0. 
I'll withhold my opinion about the 6.4L for now ... but it doesn't look good, unless you have pyromaniac condition. 
I really don't give a rat's behind which is going to get my groceries to the next traffic light faster. And I don't have the money to waste like Radram appears to have (who I find difficult to read/comprehend too). Nor would I waste my money on liabilities (like vehicles) if I did.
I'm on my 8th year on my 2000 model Cummins Ram. It has only failed 1 time (LP). And that's one time too many. But that's far better than I think I would have faired to buy either of the other 2 offerings at the time.
The point is, 6.7 Liters, 350 h.p. & 650 lb.ft (or whatever the numbers currently are) is PLENTY of power. I honestly believe the Cummins is the most effective / efficient choice if you're going to tow heavy (or relatively heavy).
Besides the fact that Cummins has to be emmissions compliant, I really wish they would spend the time making the Cummins more fuel efficient. I'll be buying me a new truck as soon as my current Cummins wears out, so maybe in 2037. By then I hope they can get 30 mpg.
If I'm going to keep my truck, I'm going to have to quit reading about how nice these 6.7 L & MegaCabs are!
- JyRO
I'll withhold my opinion about the 6.4L for now ... but it doesn't look good, unless you have pyromaniac condition. I really don't give a rat's behind which is going to get my groceries to the next traffic light faster. And I don't have the money to waste like Radram appears to have (who I find difficult to read/comprehend too). Nor would I waste my money on liabilities (like vehicles) if I did.
I'm on my 8th year on my 2000 model Cummins Ram. It has only failed 1 time (LP). And that's one time too many. But that's far better than I think I would have faired to buy either of the other 2 offerings at the time.
The point is, 6.7 Liters, 350 h.p. & 650 lb.ft (or whatever the numbers currently are) is PLENTY of power. I honestly believe the Cummins is the most effective / efficient choice if you're going to tow heavy (or relatively heavy).
Besides the fact that Cummins has to be emmissions compliant, I really wish they would spend the time making the Cummins more fuel efficient. I'll be buying me a new truck as soon as my current Cummins wears out, so maybe in 2037. By then I hope they can get 30 mpg.
If I'm going to keep my truck, I'm going to have to quit reading about how nice these 6.7 L & MegaCabs are!
- JyRO
