Didn't the poll on the first page say 93% would buy another one!! Isn't that reason enough. And besides how many people post: "my truck is bone stock & I have had many problems". There are a great many people on this site that have BOMBED the crap out of their truck!!! You play you pay!

 

I have a 6.7 with the 68rfe,...so far no hiccups ! This is my first diesel and I made my choice for a Dodge because of the 4 years free of trouble with the Hemi and I knew I couldn't go wrong with the Cummins. The 6.7 well...time will tell but I always wear a grin while I'm driving the 6.7 & 68rfe combo.

 

3.73 is the lowest ratio currently available on both the 5.9L and 6.7L,
the only other alternatives being 4.10 on both of those engines and,
I think, 4.53 for the gas engine on the Power Wagon...

Yep, I know about the stock tires being the best bet for fuel economy...
But economy is not the whole thing... As I said I'll definitely keep the
stock alluminum wheels, but dress them with 35s, I think that the Pro
Comp AT would serve my purposes pretty well... Perhaps, I might
waste 1-2 mpg because of those tires, I don't really know...

As to the configuration, very much likely it's gonna be a
2007 RAM 2500 SLT 5.9-L MEGA CAB 4X4 6-SP Manual 3.73 Axle Ratio
Anti-Spin Differential Rear Axle with stock 17" x 8.0" Forged Aluminum
Wheels with 35" Pro Comp AT tires...

I'll try to drive it like a little old lady...

Can someone here driving the same truck share their
fuel consumption data?

 

Well, that's definitely not me... I don't intend to play that sort of game...
The only uncertainty left is whether it will be 5.9L or 6.7L...

 

Congrats! It sounds great... How long have you had your new truck?

 

The 6.7 should be a great engine. I wouldn't hesitate to buy it. Oh and just because it has bigger displacement doesn't necessarily mean it'll get worse fuel economy.

 

FWIW, the 6.7 has been on the market for 4-5 years , just not bolted to a dodge chassis until now.

 

A lot of people say exactly as you just did... Then, there's a whole bunch
of others that say they wouldn't touch one (a 6.7), on account of the power
"wasted" on the emission control thing... and still others say (probably
erroneously) that it hasn't yet been proven as sound as the 5.9 has.

Also, there is the fact that there is plenty of mods for the 5.9 and almost
none for the 6.7. This last argument certainly does not affect me, as I
do not intend to go that route... but a lot of folks care much for such
things.

What I say is that it would be very interesting to verify how much power
is actually transfered to the wheels in practice when using the 5.9 and
the 6.7... That emission control thing might even make the 6.7 weaker
than the 5.9, who knows... Hasn't anyone thought of it and tested each
engine with a dyno or something???

 

That also I read somewhere else... the information out there regarding the
two engines is controversial...

In what other applications, beside the dodge chassis, has that engine been
used, do you know?

 

If it were me, I would stick with a 5.9 engined truck; the EPA emissions controls for '07 spec (and in the Cummins' case, '10 as well) will be a bit of a sticking point for the next couple of seasons. Probalby not as difficult as the competetion, however.

The 5.9L's with a 6-speed are very difficult to find that are still brand-new. There are plenty of 6.7L's with a 6-speed (manual) out there.

Do you have to buy it new? I would rather save $10 - 15k and pick up a good '05 or '06 used - you'll find a better selection if the 5.9L makes sense for you, and the depreciation curve will be leveling out somewhat. I know a new truck is tempting, but it rarely if ever makes economic sense. Guess that's whay I'm still driving one with over 300k on it.

So - how is it you've posted several times, yet your post count is still at zero...?

 

CNH has been using them in the MXU series ( in both mechanical injected , and HPCR versions) for at least 4 years now. I have heard of two engine failures in those tractors , both caused by assembly errors , one had some casting sand left in the engine somehow , which very quickly wiped the main bearings, the second one was assembled with no oil pickup tube in the pan , these were both VERY early in the production run , and i have heard of no problems since.

Jack changed some settings a while ago, He set more of the forums so posts don't count , and I think this is one of them.

 

You are contradicting yourself here. Now, I know people will disagree with me, but since I run a Dodge dealership I feel I have the authority to speak on this issue. Installing 35's and lifting the truck WILL have a negative long term affect on longevity. When you start changing factory parameters things wear faster. If you put a chip on an engine, it WILL affect long term durability. If a person is truly concerned about the durability of a truck, leave it alone.

 

IMHO none of the big three produce a reliable truck...if u want reliability get a Tacoma. Relative to each other though, when it comes to full size trucks that have diesel engines, the Dodge is and always has been the most reliable...Would rather replace 8 injectors each costing 200$ and weak front end components?...would u rather be on your 2nd engine and have to replace your turbo, rear main, and head gasket (again)...or would u rather have a bulletproof engine and replace a track bar?...we all know which description fits which truck.

 

Love my truck, wouldnt trade my Dodge for the world! Never owned anything other than Dodge!

 

The guy in the thread that you linked to bought used trucks. He just may have picked badly. Not every one can go out and buy a good used truck.That may be the real problem,not the Dodge trucks. I bought mine new and love my truck,it's 14 months old and still seems just like new.