Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Dodge,Ford,Chevy------who wins?

RoclesRocles Posts: 985
edited March 1 in Dodge
I've been yelled at for fighting against brands in
their own sites. Now I want a site devoted to
thoughts for or against full-size, American trucks.
I want facts and myths to support your F-150 or
Silverado. Hate 'em both? Worship Dodge? Fine by
I own 11 trucks for my roofing company. I have
products from all three but I always feel like I
lose everytime I have bought a Chevy. Ford is on my
mind this model year. Any thoughts?


  • RoclesRocles Posts: 985
    I began this site out of frustration of whiners telling me to leave after I was told that I'm a big bully on the new Chevy. How can any Chevy fan feel attached to this offering of re-hased styling? It seems to me that Dodge has kick-started this race and Ford has caught up.
  • You want folks to give their opinions? Isn't that what they are doing in the other topics?

    It just might be that they disagree with you on the issue of Chevy trucks. Not everyone will agree on any given topic.

    But it will be interesting to see how people respond if, in fact, they do.
  • marvbmarvb Posts: 9

    I've owned Ford and GM trucks, and will, as of 11:00 AM today, be the owner of a new RAM 3500 diesel 4WD. I beat the old Ford to death hauling trees down out of the mountains to build a cabin. It finally died on main street and I bought a 1984 GMC 4WD with the 454 engine and auto transmission. After a couple of years, the paint was 50% gone. My wife got it stuck one day and sheared off the power steering unit. It was literally hanging from the hoses! I did'nt like the automatic transmission, and I did'nt like the gas mileage (8-10 mpg). The new Dodge has a 5-speed in it, and appears to be well built. I will let you all know how it performs.

    How about your Dodge trucks? Any complaints? How did they compare with the Fords and Chevys?
  • danz28danz28 Posts: 19
    Rocles, Ford is third in power when compared to Chevy and Dodge.

    As for style, I like the comtemporary look and I am glad GM didnt try to copy Ford or Dodge.

    my 2 cents....
  • RoclesRocles Posts: 985
    I have only two Dodge trucks to judge against the other nine but I feel like I can pontificate a little. Actually they have both performed well without any major problems. One,(both are 95's)has about 50k miles on it and general maintenance has kept the engine running fine. I've had some other complaints.
    Both trucks,which were bought at the same time,have problems with front wheel bearings slipping up and needing pack-jobs every year. The one Ram has also had the tranny looked at for it was slipping in some gears through acceleration.
    I was hesitant at first to buy a Dodge but my partner was been a big fan of the redesign and forced my wallet open. My oldest trucks however, are the two original '87 Fords that we started with. One has close to 175k miles and is beaten but yet still runs like a champ. For a roofing truck, that is more anyone can ask for!
    My complaint about Dodge is that they didn't spend enough time designing the functional aspect of the truck. That might have changed by now but I'll wait to see some results first.
  • KCRam@EdmundsKCRam@Edmunds Mt. Arlington NJPosts: 3,497
    I have driven older GMs (pre-1988 design) and older Dodges (mid 80s), and have owned Fords (90 and 93), and currently have a Dodge (96).

    The older GM was a damn good truck. Plenty of heavy duty parts. The older Dodge seemed like it wouldn't die. The mid-80s Dodge I drove at my dad's job occasionally was a brick - looked like a brick, rode like a brick, but was as tough as a brick. My 90 Ford was ok, but the trans dissolved at about 45K miles. Service department had no clue - fluid was full and red, but the gears were shot. Rebuilt under warranty, and ran fine until I traded it on the 93. Now here was a piece of garbage. Literally had more brake jobs than oil changes. Bent the tie rod and broke the drag link going over a set of railroad tracks. My Ram has been terrific. Only one repair - fuel gauge module went south at 25K, but that was/is a somewhat frequent occurrence on 94-96s.

    Here's how I fell about what's out there/what's coming:


    Don't like the F150/250. Too round, too "carlike" for my tastes. I do like the Super Duty trucks. Strong components bring back thoughts of the late 70s trucks. One thing I truly can't stand about Fords, though: why do they feel I'm too stupid to read the auxiliary gauges? Having a gauge that says "NORMAL" all the way to redline is as useless as an idiot light. Until it hits the red zone, you're being told everything is ok, when it may not be.


    Not a fan of the 88-98 model. I'm leery of the IFS on the 4x4s - torsion bars are ok for small trucks, but if I can put 4000 pounds static on the front end with a diesel engine, I want a solid axle and honest-to-God springs up under there. Unfair of me to comment on the new 99's performance until it's here, but the exterior still looks like the current truck, just more rounded - not appealing to me.


    Love the big-rig nose. Roomy interior, well-organized dashboard, and the Cummins is unstoppable. Lack of a crew cab is a problem, and the factory shocks suck.

    Dream truck:

    - Ford Super Duty chassis, suspension, and transmission
    - Dodge body
    - Cummins engine

    KCRam - Pickups/Wagons/Vans+Minivans Moderator

  • RoclesRocles Posts: 985
    Does Ford make their own diesel or is it possible to get someone else? I've heard all bad words about the GM(Detroit?)diesels and great things about the Cummins. I haven't heard too much about Ford's.
  • KCRam@EdmundsKCRam@Edmunds Mt. Arlington NJPosts: 3,497
    The Ford diesel is made by Navistar. Like the Cummins, it is a medium duty engine. Check any of the diesel boards in this conference for more info.

    KCRam - Pickups/Wagons/Vans+Minivans Moderator

  • RoclesRocles Posts: 985
    Ford may be third in power but first in overall quality and value. I agree with you on GMC's grille yet the silverado looks like a bloated S-10.
    I found two cents.
  • cdeancdean Posts: 1,110
    hot damn it, i wanna get in on this. i am a chevy fan, but i agree with kcram on the 88-98 4x4's. i've heard of a lot of people tearing those things up, and if i were a serious off roader, i would want a solid axle underneath me. The IFS makes for a much better ride, i just don't think it is as tough.

    I have trouble with Dodge's. before they redesigned in '94, they were the Yugo's of trucks. somebody may have had a good one, but i now of 10 or 12 pieces of crap around where i live over the years. those trucks were aweful. when they came out with the cummins, ('92?), did you know they had to redesign the manual transmissions because they couldn't handle the torque, and they had to beef up the frames because they were literally pulling apart. thats why dodge advertises "The new Dodge", because they want everyone to forget what they had before.

    they did make a hell of an improvement in '94, but i know lots of people who love the new look and have bought them, and haven't been totally satisfied. it's usually nothing major on them, it's little stuff,like seals constantly leaking, wheel bearings going out. Dodge makes the most unreliable automatic transmission on the market. (with Ford a close second).

    The new fords and dodges were very radical designs. chevy didn't go that way with their new '99 because they did an extensive survey (probably of mostly chevy owners) and the survey said that the consumer did not want chevrolet to make some radical design. so they sculpted the sheet metal just a hair, but made a truck with the most cab space, more functional controls with the most simplified electrical system (5 wiring splices in the 99 chevy's compared to 118 in the 98 fords!), most powerful engines, most advanced traction and brake system on the market. why would you totally make a new look and piss off 600,000 people a year who buy chevy's and the 300,000 people a year who buy GMC's.

    if you don't like the current C/K, i don't blame you for not liking this new truck because it doesn't look much different. its what's inside this truck that chevy's counting selling. when ford redesigned in '97, it was love it or hate, very radical design. but after the "shock" period was over, people who didn't like it at first were starting to test drive them, and realized, hey, this is one hell of truck here. i think the same thing will happen to the chevy's. they won't pull anybody out of their fords and dodges until a few get on the market, and word gets out about performance and reliability.
  • mharde2mharde2 Posts: 278
    Well cdean, now that you brought it up. The reason Chevy, and GMC can't get a real diesel to put in their trucks is no one will sell them one unless they beef their trucks up. (ie. Catapiller,& Isusu) So far they havn't done so, and so their still stuck with that Barbie & Ken diesel.
    Also if you check the reliability reports from J.D. Powers & Assoc. you will see that GM has the the least reliable transmission of the big three, and the worst breaks to boot. (mushy mushy mushy) You can kiss the 350 and the 454 good-bye also their history.
    I must add though, that I do like some of the ideas they are coming out with in their new transmission. Such as the drain plug in the pan,(I never understood why no one ever did that) and the normal, and tow mode switch.
    Otherwise you are right on...
  • KCRam@EdmundsKCRam@Edmunds Mt. Arlington NJPosts: 3,497

    Regarding the Dodge/Cummmins:

    First year was 1989, and yes you're right, the only trans that can stand up to the damn thing is/was the old 727 automatic. I talked to the Cummins engineer who was at the Dodge Ram display at the NY Auto Show last month - he said Cummins _can't_wait_ for Chrysler to make a better set of trannies - they would love to ship Dodge the 250hp/520lb-ft engine - it's one of their standard medium-duty ratings, and would save them from having to have a special "Chrysler" edition of the 5.9 liter engine.

    As for GM trucks, I had a great deal of respect for the 73-86 C/K (and 87-91 R/V) series. In fact, my all-time favorite truck (for appearance and strength) is still the 1980 GMC Indy Pace Truck in 4x4 crew cab form. The Burt Reynolds flick "Cannonball Run" has one of these featured in it. I probably would have gotten a 1990 GMC V3500 Crew Cab instead of the Ford F150 I bought that year if I had a little more $$$ at the time, then would have gotten the dealer to order the parts and paint to match the 1980 Pace Truck. In fact, it was a pic of a brand new 79 GMC K3500 dually that turned me into a truck guy back in the fall of 78 - I was 13 going on 14 at the time, and have been a "truck guy" ever since.

    If the heavy-duty version of the new GM trucks has what it takes (solid axle, the rumored Isuzu medium-duty diesel, beefed up trans, etc.), then I will certainly give them a fair lookover when I'm ready to replace my Ram.

    KCRam - Pickups/Wagons/Vans+Minivans Moderator

  • cdeancdean Posts: 1,110
    I'd like to set you straight, mharde2, on Chevy diesel situation. The reason Chevy has always had the diesel they have now is because that GM also owns a little company called Detroit Diesel. Detroit Diesel builds more motors that Caterpillar, Cummins, International, you name it. If you like, I will list all the different applications Detroit Diesels are used in.
    If you grow tomatos in your garden in the back yard, do you go and buy tomatos at the grocery store?

    GM has a full blown diesel division within the company. Ford and Dodge do not, therefore, they HAVE to get someone else to build their diesels. I'm not saying that the Detroit Diesels that GM builds are the best out there. In fact, I'll tell you quite the opposite. My father has been a diesel mechanic servicing large diesels on oilfield, marine applications, etc. I have helped him some, and in his 40 years experience he would pick Caterpillar as the best diesel, Cummins second, and if he had to choose Detroit Diesel, he would rather have a seat with some pedals...

    GM and Caterpillar developed a diesel engine last year. They had several prototype trucks with the Caterpillar engine. Chevy loved it and was ready to cut a deal. Caterpillar backed out of the deal, because they couldn't justify building a factory that would only build maybe 250,000 a year, best case scenario. They couldn't make it economically viable to produce that size engine without charging an outrageous price for it. Remember, the Powerstroke is an International engine used in many school busses and 2 ton applications. The 5.9 Cummins is widely used in marine applications as well as 2 ton trucks. These engines are not something totally new, like the proposed Caterpillar would be.

    Nobody, including myself, really likes the 6.5 GM diesel. I think it was good motor up until '94, when they computerized the whole damn thing. A reliable motor literally just went to crap. It's not selling well. This is why GM went to Caterpillar. When that didn't work out, they went to Isuzu, whom GM has worked with in the past. Fuel Injection servicemen, who go to tech conferences every couple of months, have told me they are already learning about the fuel pumps that are going into the new Chevy/Isuzu Diesels. (They will be Bosch, instead of the popular Stanidyne, if you're curious.)

    In conclusion, mharde2, diesel companys are not scared of Chevy. Don't let the fact that you don't like them cloud any facts. Here is a fact I challenge you to look up. Do you know what the best selling truck in the WORLD was in 1996? It was the 2 ton medium duty Chevrolet Kodiak, powered by a 4 cylinder Caterpillar. They sold over 2 million of those trucks in one year, world wide.

    Some real pieces of crap aren't they…

    As far as the transmissions, I don't know where you got your numbers. If you could please, point me to them, I'll be happy to look. But I've helped friends in Fords replace or fix more transmissions than I can count with my fingers and toes. Every Ford dealer and mechanic I know tells me that Ford is years behind in that department. Intellichoice and consumer reports report GM trannies as the most reliable. Also, go have look at the Drive Train Homepage (not sure address, you should find it easily) .
  • mharde2mharde2 Posts: 278
    You kind of made my point on the diesel subject cdean. I don't usually jump on anyone like that but I get tired of Chevy people attacking Ford and Dodge all the time. It seems like Chevy people are the only ones that have derogatory comments about someone elses trucks. I never used the term piece of crap..I believe that was you.
    I think Ford, Dodge, and Chevy all make good trucks, some are stronger or weaker in certain areas than others, but over all it boils down to personal preference. this is the url to that reliability report on Car Point.
  • mharde2mharde2 Posts: 278
    cdean, click on Car Point Raises the Bar on Reliability when the page comes up.
  • RoclesRocles Posts: 985
    I have to state that mharde was correct in his findings. I found the same conflicting stories from mechanics versus publications about the tranny of Chevy. Every mechanic that I have known claim GM outperforms in reliability than Ford yet, JD power and truckworld state the opposite.
    So what's the deal? I have never expierenced any problem from either brand that we have. The biggest pain-in-the-[non-permissible content removed] truck is that one Dodge with its seals and bearings.
  • cdeancdean Posts: 1,110
    mharde, i apologize for making it seem like i made derrogatory comments. i not once said anything bad about dodges or fords, not once, only about my personal experience with their unreliability, and the reports i read in the 3 different sites confirming that. you took the term "some real pieces of crap" out of context. i wrote that immediately after i pointed out a successful heavy duty line from GM as sarcasm toward your comments that GMs needed to beef up they trucks so they could have more than "Barbie and Ken diesels." I should have plainly stated that i disagree with your statement that GMs cannot get a good diesel because they are not beefed up enough. My point is that GM never has wanted any other diesel because they have felt that their own was adequate. I am very sorry if I in someway was like those Chevy people who are "the only ones that have derogatory comments about someone elses trucks." Please quote me wherever i did this.

    Yes, those mushy breaks will gone off the new Silverados, thank goodness. That is one thing that made me wonder if GM ever took their own product out for a test drive.

    The 350 and the 454 will NOT be gone, though. Both engines will appear in the heavy duty line, 3/4 ton and up. Both engines, I'm sure will be phased out eventually, as GM goes to the LS1 engine platform. Has anyone heard about their future heavy duty platform? They've been keeping pretty mum on that whole subject. A dealer friend of mine that went to the national dealer convention said that there was word floating around of a 8.0 liter V8 to replace the 454, with torque in the 550 ftlb range, coming in year 2000 or shortly after.

    I find it very odd about the conflicting reliabilities on the transmissions. Who's right? Why should we trust any of these places if there is no consistency? any other input?
  • cdeancdean Posts: 1,110
    Mharde, I found a fault in your report. I looked a little deeper into the Carpoint report on the reliability of the Chevy Transmissions. I welcome you to check it out.

    You will notice that the heading says "Transmission and Driveline"

    If you look at the key, the symbol for the chevy transmissions and drivetrains is "moderate problems"

    Click on that little symbol for any year. It gives you the specific problem on that model. It is the same problem on all the models. As a matter of fact, it is not actually the transmission that it talks about. It reads:

    "An occasional problem on this vehicle is failure of the Front Axle Acutator on models with Four Wheel Drive.

    The cost to repair the Front Axle Acutator is estimated at $72.36 for parts and $32.50 for labor."

    The reliability report on "Chevrolet Transmission and Drivetrains" states that the actuator that locks the truck in four wheel drive has had moderated failures and it costs $104.86 to get it fixed. It says nothing about the transmissions. hopefully this link will get you there.|K_1500?Topic=Reliability

    Say what you want about the truck, but GM builds a bullet proof transmission.
  • cdeancdean Posts: 1,110
    Try this link if want a transmission report from a transmission guy. when you get there scroll down to section 3 where he discusses the Big 3 pickups.
  • BrutusBrutus Posts: 1,113
    All excuses aside, the Chevy diesel offers the lowest horsepower and, by far, the lowest torque. What might be in the future is irrelevant to the person who needs to tow a heavy today. By the time Chevy catches up, Dodge and Ford will also have advanced beyond where they are at now. No excuses. Chevy is behind.

    The 515 lb-ft torque is nice to think about, but Ford and Dodge can already make an engine that will do that. It's the total package that need refined. Your tranny has to be able that kind of torque. When Chevy puts out an engine that will produce that kind of torque, then they can jump into the debate about the total package that Ford and Dodge have been waging for the past few years. No excuses. Chevy is behind.

    Of course, Chevy will replace the 350 and the 454. The 454 will be replaced by a V-10, which I believe will be introduced by GMC in the year 2000 model. The 350 is already being replaced by a more efficient engine. The 350 has been an awesome engine for Chevy. At the same time, the Model-T use to be an awesome car for Ford, but they wouldn't think about selling them today. Technology has changed. The more efficient V-10 has replaced the big V-8 engines and significantly superior V-8 engines have replaced engines like the 350 and the 351. Chevy/GMC are making the changes. No excuses. Chevy is behind.

    The knock isn't against the historical quality of Chevy/GMC products. Fact is that they got lazy. Even Ford got temporarily lazy. Ford woke up, and, in my opinion, has more than answered the call (44 possible chassis/cab designs on the new Superduty models). Only time will tell if Chevy has heeded the call. They better hear it soon. No excuses. Chevy is behind.
This discussion has been closed.