Bluedually4x4

So maybe some one can help me out a little with a problem.
At work we just got an 08-09 superduty red cab, auto 4x4 with a 10 foot flat bed. With 10,000 miles on it so far it gets a impressive 8 mpg mostly town mileage. And bogs down bad yanking an A300 all wheel steer Bobcat with just a bucket on it.

I have an 11 year old 3500 4x4 with 107,000 miles and a 5 speed. With only 550 ish foot pounds I could yank a 12'x50' mobile home at the same rate as the ford pulls a skidsteer. Plus in town I average 15mpg.

So why is dodge going bankrupt and not ford? I don't get it...

Tedonlin150

I've been wondering the same thing.

HotRodTodd

#1 its not a super duty, its a Stupid Duty
#2 Dodge spends its money making a better product rather than spending it on zillions of commercials lieing to people claiming to have a better product.
People are sheep, they believe it must be true because it said so on TV.
Ford also screws people on their warranty, rarely fixing anything, not to mention, Ford had a 12 month, 12,000 mile warranty while Dodge offered 7/70.
Bottom line, it costs more money to make a better product, which unfortunately means lower proffits.

patdaly

For the same reason you have your current president........... Once the herd starts to move, there ain't no stoppin it.

cincydiesel

Because comsumers are more worried about what the interior looks like.. Besides according to all Ford salesman they make 10,000 lbs of torque and have 900 horsepower..

rich

because ford sells the heck out of their f150 and other products and doesnt rely on their hd trucks as much

Guardrail

To be factual... Dodge buys their motors from a better source. I really haven't found the shell my Cummins is wrapped in to be superior to any other brand out there.

40,000 miles - U-Joints
48,000 miles - Shocks
52,000 miles - Lift pump
70,000 miles - front axle U-joint

I'm just saying... I like my Dodge, but if the only truck out there with a Cummins was a Ford, guess what, I'd own a Ford.

SOhappy

Uh...I know several Ford owners with a worse track record than that.
(What, no ball joints yet?)

rich

yea i agree i'm a guy who buys what will do the job and so far the ctd is the one

TonyB

1) When buying a 3/4 or 1-ton chassis, you are buying a motor/drivetrain to do a specific job. In 'our' case, Cummins does tow/haul weight VERY well.

2) I've heard rumor that Daimler literally bled Chrysler dry, and they've been trying to recover ever since the separation.

3) Chrysler seems to build fun cars, i.e. any car with a hemi (). Not too many economy cars here in the US, so when fuel hit $4-5, their sales dried up.

Tony

03 ant a hemi

You got to be kidding about Diamler bleeding Chrysler dry. Diamler is the reaosn Chrysler did not declare bankruptcy years ago.

Diamler tends to get rid of companys it owns shares in if they see no future in the company turning a profit.

As for the original question. Hp and Torque are confusing numbers. Really it is just a measurement used for rating as oppsoed to actual work done.

Effective horsepower (EHP), True horsepower (thp) or wheel horsepower (whp) is what the engine actually makes to work. After all the inefficiencies are accounted for it is HP mentioned above that matters. Unfortunatly we will never see a rating on an engine at the rear wheels. They would have to start over in the HP war.

RickG

At the time of the merger Chrysler was in better shape than Ford or GM and in no danger of bankruptcy . http://www.thefreelibrary.com/AUTO+M...ws)-a083821927

Bluedually4x4

I agree on the HP part. Look up what a horse power is and you will find even a horse does not in fact have 1 horse power. Torque on the other hand is a real force and can be measured.

Ford makes a great many fuel efficient cars that they do not sell over here. Must be that the whole problem is sheep...

supr

Dodge builds great HD trucks. Up until this model year, even it's 1500 was #3 out of 3 according to many sources. It's cars have not sold that well. It's overall quality, acording to Consumer Report, is in last place of the big 3. Chrysler has depended on trucks & SUV's for profit, similar to GM & Ford. When fuel went $4+, They all stared sucking huge cash reserves.
Ford has better mangement, overall. At least they understand supply & demand. They stareted scaling back production a long time ago. Further, their qulity is closing in on the Japenese, at least, according to Consumer report. Ford also has a world wide operation, Chrysler does not. At least the Fiat thing may help to bring some cars that are fuel efficient. Their quality was poor in the past, but I guess we will see where ir as, as they roll their cars into Chrysler.

Ron E

I have to ask. Where do you get your information?