Dodge,Ford,Chevy-----Who Wins? - II

quadrunner500

You would think a Japanese 900 should have the measure of a Ducati, and probably does in the 1/4 mile and top speed, but I'm not so sure that translates into an advantage on a road race course, where the likes of Corser and Fogarty just absolutely dominated. The Duc is just a twin after all, but must be incredibly optimum for a road course. The 750 Japanese fours are close to ideal also. But the big bore (900+) Japanese superbikes are fast where the track has long straights, but get eaten for lunch in the turns, braking etc.

BTW, I've owned Fords, still own one. They have been good, but my Chevys have been good too, for different reasons sometimes. I like my Chevy dealer more than my Ford dealer, is one good example.

quadrunner500

Husabergs are a wild ride.

lvstang

Unless I'm mistaken (happens all the time according to zbad) The current World Superbikes only allow the Japanese 750's against the larger Duc's. Corser and Fogarty and the like are superhuman in their ability but I'm certain in the same state of tune given equal displacement the Japanese Fours would run away and hide from the twins. I think they even give Harley up to a 1000cc's but I'd check on that one before I'd call that fact. Thanx for the thumbs up on the Husy.
All trucks have to have something good about them or they couldn't possibly sell so many of the different brands year in and year out.

Rocles

Now lvstang---
You know that selling trucks is no measure when ZBADDD is concerned. According to the Bad-man, only idiots buy trucks that aren't made by GM.

Quad,
Those twins have always had a good torque advantage hence start-up after braking gives the Duc a good ride. I doubt though, that on most tracks, identical displaced engines from the Japanese and Ducs would be an ugly race. Those Red and Blue bikes would be dusting the Italians.


PS: Am I the only guy who doubts that Hypo-ZBAD-crite ever owned a Ford? After knocking EVERTHING about the truck--he then wants us to believe that he bought one? I'm not a huge fan of Chevys but I'll always acknowledge their advanages.

lvstang

Zbad may have had that Ford but you have to piece the story together. He bought it used from some little old man with 35000 miles on it. Then he cries on why the Ford dealer won't fix everything for free. I've asked a number of times why Mr. educated six figure income electrical engineer degreed wannabe had to buy a used vehicle but I don't get a response.
See ya

quadrunner500

When I was never wrong on these details. But I haven't kept up. So forgive me if I'm wrong this time. But I think the performance of the street going 900 Duc is very close to the performance, maybe even a match for Honda CBR900RR and Kawasaki Ninja ZX-9 superbikes, both in 1/4 mi and top speed. I'll have to check that out. But neither of those two bikes handle better than the Duc. The Kaw is heavy and the Honda had spooky steering. I think the Duc is faster than either on a road course. Now that 1000 Harley was a joke. That was Duhamel's riding that made it go.

lvstang

Sorry for being anal. But I don't think we're on the same page. I'm specifically talking about the Superbike race series where the twins are given a displacement advantage over the fours. Just like Glidden had to run more weight in NHRA with cleveland heads(long time ago and I know that will get the chevy Ford thing going again!)
Talk to ya later

Rocles

lvstang,
Oh wow--I didn't hear that ZBAD is also an electrical engineer! I think it's also strange that he bought a F-150 but claims to haul a "40 ft. goose-neck trailer full of livestock"!!!
ZBAD is a fraud. I have e-mailed him in the past and every time you try to pin him down--he disappears for a few days and then never answers your questions. He is probably some fat clown working at a movie rental store and just gets his jollies off knocking Fords for anything.

swobig

not that I'm endorsing either one of you guys...

swobig

Did you see Car and Driver TV today?? They did a comparision between a GMC 3/4 ton 6.0L vs. Ford F250 Super Duty V10. Basically as they put it the GMC kicked the Fords butt in every catagory, power, towing unloaded AND LOADED, comfort, livability. I thought the Super Duty was a good truck, but... wait till the new HD GM's come out

dodgeram

No wiat till the dodge heavyduty' s come out!!!

2002!

dodgeram

I wonder why car and driver didn't use ther ram in there comparo, because it would have done a lot better than the ford did! The 6.0l onlt does zero - 60 in 9.2 seconds, my 3/4 ton 5.9 gas 4x4 does zero 60 in 8.9seconds, and thats with a plow harness on the front. I'll be honsest when my 94ram was new it did zero to 60 in 9.9seconds, I 5 years later, aolt of hard abuse and racing, plowing, and offroading, Plus the ever popular k&n filtercharger, and I cut the time down to 8.9 seconds, thats pretty dam fst for a heavyduty 4x4!
plus its faster than the 6.0l chevy, even if the chevy is still new, the horspower diffrence should make up for much faster times!!

swobig

They didn't choose a Dodge because it's not in the same class!! heeheehee

lvstang

Pretty sure that's old news. Ford is almost 1000 pounds heavier. Still no exuse for trouncing. Ford has a few heavier duty features, one that I think is very important is a full floating rear end. And I don't care for torsion bars on a heavy duty truck( I heard chevy is changing that however.) I am looking forward to a rematch with the 2000 V10(310 hp and 425 lbs torque.
Dodgeram please check out the motor trend comparo on dodge vs. Ford V10's. According to that your mighty 360 beats dodges own V10.

barlitz

Edmunds must have for 2000 an F150 enough said.If anyone has something to say we'll send them Red Sox to kick some @SS just like they did to Cleveland.

swobig

even with those engine improvements it'll probably still get beat. The way C&D made it sound there was no contest, and the 99' already has a big torque advantage. I still think Ford makes a good truck, but they obviously have some work to do. Can't wait to see the new GM HD's - hopefully they'll improve on a already good thing...

Rocles

Thanks KC!! I'm going to check out youe story now.

Rocles

Time to restart this topic.

Hey ZBADDD,
Check out the sales figures big guy!!!!!!! Remember the debate?? F series best selling truck for 22 years and now the best OVERALL for 3. This is after the wholly-new Chevy was introduced? How could this happen?

cdean

Production problems for one, mainly due to the strike and new factory ramp ups. I know a small town GM dealer who just went out of business because he could only fill about 10% of his orders. only the big city dealers were getting trucks. he wasn't getting anything close to what he needed from the factory for the last 2 years, and all his customers went elsewhere. in a small town, that meant ford or dodge.

jcmdie

Well at least they ended up with a better truck.

Rocles

cdean,
That sucks. I hate hearing about bone-head decisions by the brass and union and how it affects the little guy. Even if he did sell Chevys.

Rocles

ZBADDDD-check out post 137

swobig

that title for a 4th straight year, but stranger things have happened...

rspading

Have you TD owners checked out the TDR Website? It is all new and redesigned with an active discussion forum and lot's of new pages. There are both member areas and nonmember areas, but everyone gets to read the forum. It is a great site and growing rapidly. The TDR has over 15000 members so the expertise in the discussions is second to none when it comes to knowledgeable people helping other diesel owners. The site is at http://www.turbodieselregister.com/

Rocles

Is post 145 like an Edmund's?

KCRam

Roc,

The chat board is similar to a newsgroup - posts are threaded from the initial subject.

kcram
Community Leader/Smart Shopper Conference

Rocles

I don't see much difference here. Give a few bucks here and less there. Also these are generic figures. Resale figures don't divulge initial price difference and varying componets of the trucks. Trim levels is only half the game.

powerisfun

After I posted this, I thought a better comparison would be either to compare prices for the basic work-truck (lowest level, no options), or the maxed-out top-of-the-line models with every factory option possible. I think there might be a lot less variation in those cases than in the middle line like I chose. As a scientist, I've gotten used to choosing the middle-ground data as that is usually the most accurate, but it's probably just the opposite here.
I wish Edmund's provided the invoice/MSRP price when a vehicle was new for all years. That would be much more interesting.

Rocles

I would bet on the basic, stripped-down models. There are no degrees of trim levels to argue over and the engines would be in line.

gthilton

I ordered a Ford Super Duty F-250 Crew Cab and expect delivery end of next week. I've been a GM buyer all my life, as short as it is (38). I have GM employee discount and $1000 from the sidesaddle gas tank suit both available to me, but had to pass it up. Only GM crew cab now for the 2nd year is the old C/K platform,(12 years old technologically) and this year it is only available with a short bed. I can't even buy a full size crew cab long bed from GM. I wasn't about to wait another year to buy a first year model which are famous for flaws, as I plan on driving this for 10 years. I admit I have been a little PO'd at GM's inability to turn new product. Since Dodge isn't making a crew cab, this means that Ford basically owns the market for 2 years. How many loyal GM buyers will end up with a Ford and never go back? I spent about $2500 extra but can't justify the GM option.

Rocles

Chevy guys that went Ford and never went back? Hmmmmmm, I may qualify......

powerisfun

I understand the reason you went with Ford for the
long bed. I can't believe GM would only offer a short bed on a heavy-duty truck.
One note on the technology of the C/K's, however. The motors were upgraded substantially in '96 (Vortec engines) with much more power and better fuel economy. The Vortec 5.7L (350) still has equal or better power and gets equal or better gas mileage than either the '99 Ford 5.4L or the '99 Dodge 5.9L (don't know enough about the 2000's yet, but I suspect they are the same. I'm not putting down the Ford or the Dodge engines, by the way, I like them both). Also, all the C/K's are available with all the most advanced safety equipment, comfort features, etc. Finally, the prices are quite a bit lower than the Silverado's/New-Sierra's.
I've lost track of my point... Oh yeah, it's unfair to claim that the GM C/K's are 12-year-old technology. Now a 12-year-old bodystyle is true.
If you bought the Ford Super-duty because it was better looking than the GM crew-cabs, I'd be in complete agreement (The GM crew-cabs are the most hideous looking things. They're too low and too narrow).

-powerisfun

P.S. As you can probably guess from my somewhat defensive posture, I am the owner of a C/K truck with the Vortec 350.

lvstang

You call that a "defensive posture"? Compared with Some other G.M. owners that was down right mild. Considering that the Votec 5.7 is very capable and G.M. is rumored to go with OHC designs in the near future the current 4.8 and 5.3 might never receive the kind of after market support the old small block got. In other words you think the new motor is going to have a 40 year run?

powerisfun

I'm not sure any engine will have a 40-year run from now. I have a feeling that the internal combustion engine may have only 20-25 years or so left till everyone goes electric with fuel-cell/solar power.
But on the topic of OHC verses OHV, it's a shame that OHC has become such a buzz word associated with "high tech". To me it's not high tech, it's just another option. Whether it's a good option for a truck engine, time will tell with Ford and Toyota. Ford's seem to be doing great, and the Toyota gets praises left and right. The Ford even has more low-end torque than the GM's which is just the opposite of what I'd expect from an OHC from what I've read. In fact, if I didn't know anything about the engines and someone showed me their torque curves and said "Guess which one is the OHC engine". I'd guess the GM's because it's flatter and higher reving.
I'd prefer GM to stick with the OHV engines, even in it's cars. The 3.8L in my wife's '89 Buick LeSabre (with 155,000 miles on it) kicks the crap out of the Dodge Intrepid's OHC engine and gets the same (or better) gas mileage at 30+ mpg highway. It's not even the supercharged 3.8L, but man has it got torque! Public perception will probably force them to change it though.
-powerisfun

lvstang

You're probably right with fuel cell technology but until they come up with a cleaner way to produce electricity ie: no coal plants etc. It has been shown that electric cars produce more of some pollutants than current gas cars. Plus battery disposal problems will have to be addressed. On a side note OHC design may give an added benefit in an engines ability to rev to higher RPMs but it has NOTHING to do with the torque producing ability of an engine. Cam profile, bore and stroke and rod length determine a motors torque. What I think the OHCs strengths are is basically an easier head to control air and fuel through so that stricter emissions will be able to be met without killing off power.
See ya

Rocles

Electric motor in one of my trucks? I think it'll be longer than 25 years......

powerisfun

I thought I read somewhere (perhaps erroneously written) that OHC engines usually have less torque at the lower rpm range. If it's true, maybe it's just a coincidence as most OHC's may be tuned for higher rpm's. Ford's truck engines have tons of low-end torque.

Rocles:
That's a good point about electric motors in trucks. Maybe trucks will keep the IC engine alive and well.

-powerisfun

lvstang

When Illmor/Mercedes were cleaning up at Indy a few years back it was due to a loophole that allowed many advantages to a "pushrod" motor. More boost etc. This was based on the belief that among other things an OHC design can rev much higher and make more top end HP. The Illmor design had the cam so high in the block the pushrods were very short which increased the valve train stability thus negating a supposed advantage. Again, were the cam is in the motor has nothing to do with the torque. Powerisfun, you are correct when you say that OHC's are "tuned" to create more top end power but that's due to cam profile, bore and stroke, etc. Ford chooses to "tune" the truck motors for torque as opposed to utilizing any high RPM capability which would be a waste in a truck. Also the absence of pushrod holes and a more centralized spark plug location make an easier cylinder head to suite whatever need may arise.

cdean

OHC vs OHV has nothing to do with torque curves. NOTHING!!! cam profile, timing, head port design, spark effieciency determine torque curves. doesn't matter if you put your cam on top, bottom, or in the backseat....

lvstang

Backseat? those would be some long pushrods!!!!

andy_jordan

Something small enough to put in the back of a Tundra!!!!

jcmdie

I'm not so sure that a tundra could handle that load in the back seat. The weight would be OK but the driver would have to move his seat all the way up.

gwmoore

Might have to throw the Ginsu knives out the window too.

Rocles

Throw Ginsu knives away? NO!!! Hey!! Those knives cut through steel but are still delicate enough for my tomatoes!!

Now where was I going with this one......?

dave40

Vortec 8100 V-8
Touted as the most powerful gasoline engine offered to the American truck market, GM's Vortec 8100 V-8 will replace the company's 7.4-liter and 502-cubic-inch engines. The 8100 is designed to be California LEV compliant while providing industry-leading acceleration when pulling a heavy load. 30 more hp then Dodge & Fords V-10s...plus more Torque too !

Rocles

For now......

wildmanbaker

It probably will not be called "Thriftmaster", and the towing capacity will be low because of the trailer that will be permently attached, called the FUEL TANK. I seem to remember an old Ford Truck engine, a 537C.I., seems to have faded, something about mileage.

Wildman

cdean

ahhh, but remember, GM is that one company in Detroit that can make an engine get good mileage....

really though, Ford and Chevy (and Dodge will be) both have updated their line of engines with new units of smaller displacement, more power, better mileage. it just seems really odd that their replacing the best powerhouse with a BIGGER engine. It would really seem that the one-ton trucks would get a 6.5-7.0 liter big block, that would produce same power or better as the v10s of the world, and then this 8.1 would be for the BIG trucks...

powerisfun

Keep in mind too that 8.1L is only 494 ci, so it's not that much bigger than the 454 and it's smaller than the 502.
-powerisfun

Rocles

Was the 537 a stroked 460?

powerisfun,
Your point? That 454 is a beast on gas no matter what cdean's dad's trucks do otherwise.