Pluses and minuses of Common Rail vs. 2nd gen 24v?

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Sep 7, 2007 | 02:18 PM

#31

Marty86

Thread Starter

Registered User

Joined: Jan 2007

Posts: 196

Likes: 0

From: Texas

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug_TX

Did you recalibrate your speedo after the change? That could make a difference. Though I think the difference between the 265's and 285's is fairly small right?

I know a friend who has a f150, and he went from 245 to 285's, and his mileage decreased by 2mpg, so I'd assume that from 265 to 285 would only be about 1 mpg.

Sep 7, 2007 | 08:27 PM

#32

Dangerous Dave

Registered User

Joined: Aug 2007

Posts: 485

Likes: 0

From: Shepherd, TX

Since these Michelins (at least two of them are original - other two used from local tire shop) have only lasted 120K I think it's only right to get the same tires again!

Read too many iffy things about some other brands anyhow....

Sep 11, 2007 | 07:31 PM

#33

ridofpwrstroke

Registered User

Joined: Sep 2002

Posts: 800

Likes: 0

From: Palmer Alaska

Quote:

Originally Posted by tool

On the highway with my '99 I could do as well as 21 MPG, the '06 is only giving about 16 MPG

That is a significant drop in mileage and an obvious major increase in operating costs!

Your overdrive ratio is killing you. Put on a GV and you will get 22+ at 65mph. My dually does all the time. At 70 I am averaging 19.8mpg. I think the 24valves sound better on the outside and the CR sound better on the inside. 4 doors is better than 2 suicide doors. Track bar stinks on 24 valve. Power stock to stock isnt even close. All in all I miss the 24 valve. I do like the bodystyle of the 2nd gens better and the dash is better on the 24valves. I prefer the G56 to the 5600. I hated where reverse was. Plus shifting was very notchy. Find me a 98 12v dually quad cab 5 speed and I would sell to get that.