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

Rocles · May 1998

Hey! what of my earlier questions? Tell me about quality differences of the big three. thanks

jeff84 · May 1998

built a radio station transmitter site at 10,000' been running it on john deer diesels for 10 years. used up 2 fords 3/4 4x4. still have the 94. they burn oil like a champ. ( thats where I put all my waste oil) just kidding. the gauges all fail on both trucks but I never got stuck 20 miles up in the mud and snow. been using a 96 blazer for the last 2 years. 50,000 miles off road in 2 years. no problems. just bought a new 3/4 4x4 chev for the smooth ride on the 20 mile dirt road. the open axle is great in the mud. don't let people give you that bull about a solid axle is better off the road. I was a dealership mechanic for 10 years befor getting this station. you havent been scared till you slide off the side of a road you cant see because of the snow covering the mud.

Rocles · May 1998

jeff84, Do you prefer open or a solid axle? It wasn't quite clear. I presume the Fords had this axle also? I'm curious-thanks.

Rocles · May 1998

NEVER buy a manual if you plan on a considerable amount of towing. Automatics can tow twice as much pounds without any stress to the tranny. Manuals are fine for other jobs---just not towing.I would seriously re-think your decision to consider manuals.
Most people would agree with my two cents.

cdean · May 1998

Rocles,

I disagree with your two cents. Automatics have a torque converter that allows for slippage between the motor and the rest of the driveline, which means you don't get about 15% of your engine's power. Most new auto's have a lock up torque converter which means once your up to highway speed, the torque converter locks solid with the drive gear, just like a manual clutch would. Manual transimissions are usually built a little heavier duty than automatics. If you pull with automatics, you have to be careful because all the stress caused by pulling will make your transmission fluid become much hotter than normal, reducing its viscosity, and reducing its protection. that is why many trucks have posts on them telling you not to pull in overdrive, but in 3rd gear. this mainly gives the engine and transmission more rpms so more transmission fluid is circulated.

automatics are not built for pulling. if you are a serious load puller, and plan to put lots of miles pulling, i would go with a manual. it will last much longer, and you will enjoy 100% of your engines output, instead of 85%, which also translates into better fuel economy.

cdean · May 1998

if there are any dodge owners out there reading, i'd like to know about all around workmanship and quality on their trucks, honest truth please. I've heard a few sad stories about seals, bearings, acessory trouble--stuff that keeps you in touch a little too much with your local serviceman. then i also hear some totally satisfied people at the same time. anyone out there with input?

0061 · May 1998

Rocles
I posted message 55 and I read your response.I
have to disagree with - not that I know much about
it, but I use to be an eighteen wheeler truck
driver before I went to Medicine (and during as well). I also pulled a travel trailer all over Europe(and believe u me, there are up to 16% grades and hairpin curves that u will not believe! In terms of power, control, efficiency and most of all - I'm used to it. Cdean put it in
a professional lingo, I "speak from my heart"
.At any rate, what about the rest Of my previous post, any comments?
TIA
Isaac(from Israel).

Rocles · May 1998

cdean,
I was aware of slippage and yes, a manual would actually hold up longer if one was pulling 1000lbs. My point is that automatics are far easier to drive when pulling without concerns of the clutch. Lets face it, not many people check out the weight they are pulling and most have half-tons to begin with.
Take for instance: two identical 98 F-150's
Both of these trucks have the 4.6l V-8 triton motor. Both have have 3.55 rears and both are super-cab, 4x2 short-beds. Every thing is identical with the exception being the transmission. Now let me share the statistics from Ford themselves on maximum trailer weights for limits:
The automatic: 11,500 max and 7,000 reg
The manual: 7,800 max and 3,300 reg

I agree that the manual would last longer but I go by actual expierences. My conclusion is that for John Doe,who only needs a half-ton, generally tows maybe five times a year with his two kids and wife. He shouldn't have to worry about the weight or jerking his trailer back and forth as Johnny Jr. is pulling his sister's hair.
Not everybody in this world buys Superdutys. We can banter all day long about the virtues of the stick and I do agree with you on those numbers that you thoughtfully put up. I'm curious how many of you out there have an auto and pull regularly. Please let me know. I might be alone in my thinking.

cdean · May 1998

I am kinda surprised by the numbers from Ford, I thought it would be the other way around. I totally agree with what you said about the occasional puller. I pull about 10-15 times a year with an automatic, and i feel i have no need for a manual. But there are some people who haul 30 ft cattle trailers every week or maybe their business involves pulling around a heavy utility trailer. those are the folks i recommend getting manuals. If you are an RV puller, it's kinda up to you. Automatics make vehicle ownership so much nicer, and their almost worth the money everyone charges for them. Chevy charged me $800 something for mine. what does dodge and Ford autos cost?

Brutus · May 1998

The auto trans option for the Superduty is $824 dealer invoice and $970 MSRP. One thing to keep in mind is that replacing a clutch in a heavy duty 4x4 isn't cheap. It will cost you about $900 if you have it done at the dealer.

sleepr · May 1998

I go with Rocles....auto tows better. All truck autos have a tranny cooler which moderates and controls temperatures in the gearbox....manuals don't.

Manufacturers all rate the autos higher. Are you gonna risk your warranty?

0061 · May 1998

Hey Guys
Any response to my post (55), PLEASE ?

Thanx, Isaac, From israel.

mharde2 · May 1998

Sense we are talking transmissions, is there anyone that has installed a transmission fluid filter and temp gauge?

mharde2 · May 1998

isaac, If your not going to do much off roading, go with the 2wd. I would opt for the upgraded tires, and the towing package. The exhaust break would be a good idea if you plan to travel the mountains. The short bed would cut down on your over all length, and improve your maneuverability. I don,t know much about shells and tops.

0061 · May 1998

mharde2
Thanx for the comment.
True, I will not do much of roading.
About the short bed - since I do plan to take trips for a few days at the time, I wonder if the
short bed will be enough(that is why I need the shell), but I guess it's easy to find out.
Thanx again, Isaac.

mharde2 · May 1998

Isaac, the short bed on the Ford is 7' long. At least it was on my 93. Good luck...

Rocles · May 1998

Actually, it is down to 6 1/2 feet now. The box on the Ford is deeper though,so I guess I'm saying two half-dozens equal a dozen!

jeff84 · May 1998

rocles I prefer the open axle for off road. I seem to have more control in the mud, but I had the solid axle for years. also the auto is better in the snow and mud for me than a manual trans but I prefer a manual for taking down heavy loads on narrow winding roads

Rocles · May 1998

I always thought that a manual tranny would perform better in snow. The lower gears generally give better response for me but then again, I live in Delaware. Our winters are generally mild with an occasional doozy.

Rocles · May 1998

Does anyone have figures for the sales of light-duty trucks? How much is Ford beating everyone else? How does GM as a whole compare? Dodge?

cdean · May 1998

Sales

Ford F-series 770 k
Chevy C/K 560 k
Dodge Ram 350 k
GMC 170 k

Motormouth · May 1998

Thanks for the info, CDean. Just curious as to whose figures you are using there...

KCRam · May 1998

I saw those very figures in Car and Driver's 1998 Truck Buyer's Guide. They print calendar year sales for all light trucks they cover.

The thing that stands ou to me is, over the last 3 years, the large increases of both Dodge and Ford compared to the near-stagnation of Chevy and GMC. Ford is clearly outselling GM as a whole now, and it should be the same in 1998, as GM can't compete with the heavy duty models from Ford and Dodge. You're looking at solid-axle (4x4), heavily-sprung V10 and medium-duty-diesel powered F's and Ds, against the GM trucks with IFS/torsion bars, weak diesels and an inefficient 454. If Daimler can slide Chrysler a few bucks for another Ram plant, Dodge can catch up to Chevy in terms of sales, and probably have room to add the crew cab a lot of us Rammers have been waiting for.

AlMango · May 1998

cdean,

If you're still curious about the Ram reliability, I have a 96 Dodge Ram 4x2 that has had me in the shop too many times to count!

Here are a sampling of some of the problems:

Rear leaf springs were making a very loud
squeeking moise and had to be replaced, under
warranty at 15,000 miles.

Rear shocks went at 30,000 miles and were
replaced under warranty.

Power stearing tank sprung a leak and left me
stranded...wheel wouldn't even turn. 35,500
miles and replaced under warranty.

Spark plugs were replaced during my 30,000 mile
tuneup and I was back to the dealership twice
after the initial tuneup because they kept
misfiring. Finally they replaced the hoses...
under warranty.

I've had a problem with the stearing column
since about 20,000 miles. The problem is most
evident when going over small road bumps at
lower speeds and also when cornering. It feels
like the steering column is loose and the road
vibration travels up through the column. The
first time I brought it in for repairs the
service department replaced the "box" (pointing
to the base of the column). It was fine for
about 1,000 miles but the problem slowly came
back. The second time in they replaced the box
and the column, informing me it wasn't a recall
but a bulletin with the Rams. It's been about
500 miles since they replaced the column and
the problem is coming back again!! I have
another appointment tomorrow for this problem.
The least the dealer could do is make up a
personalized coffee mug with my name on it!

Ohh yehh the windsheild cracked and I just had
it replaced the other day. I was lucky to have
witmessed the repairman remove the exterior
rubber molding and with the lightest push from
the inside the windsheid came out. The glass
wasn't even glued in!!! The installer said in
his 20 years on the job he has never had a
windsheild poop out like that. Gee I wonder
why the glass cracked in the first place!

At this point I'm ready to get rid of the truck...
and am I a complete idiot for looking at the
Durango??? Sorry about the long post!

Motormouth · May 1998

... your truck ought to be taken out and shot.

Then again, any manufacturer can produce a lemon or two. But if it were me, I'd think twice about running right back for a Durango. Granted it's not the same chassis as the Ram, but still...

If you do insist on the Durango, at least get the "bumper-to-bumper" warranty!

lehmann · May 1998

I am thinking of buying a compact PU. I am
looking at the S10 and the Ranger.

I will not be carrying much weight.
I will not be doing any towing.
I am leaning toward the S10 on looks alone.
Also, the S10 comes with 15" tires rather than
the 14" on the Ranger. Everything else seems to
be equal.

Any opinions? Any major problems with either?
(I never owned a PU.)

Motormouth · May 1998

...and it sounds to me as if the Chevy S10 has it.

Seems to me your choice is made.

Maybe some other owners of S10s will join in here and give you some feedback on what their experience has been with them.

cdean · May 1998

Motormouth

I got the sales figures out of Popular Mechanics magazine, last month, and I saw the same figures in what i think was "4-wheeler" magazine, (i was in a waiting room). I saw the '96 sales numbers next to the '97. i was a little off when i predicted them earlier somewhere. the '96 numbers were

ford 700k
chevy 550k
dodge 240k
gmc 220k

gmc dropped off 50k this year and dodge increased about 110k.

I agree with kcram about GM stagnating mainly in the heavy duty market. I still see lots of chevy's being bought in fleets in one ton and 3/4 HD being used for personal/company all purpose trucks. but i've seen a growing trend over the past 2 years of Fords mainly being bought in the Superduty (1 1/2 ton) class with tool beds and utility beds, delivery load trucks, etc. GM hasn't changed anything in years, while Ford and Dodge have pretty fresh stuff, which is just more appealing. (as long as they're trouble free.)

KCRam · May 1998

cdean
Some of the numbers you have there are 1995 numbers - in 96, Dodge sold 370K, they actually dropped 20,000 in 1997, partly from the 97 Ford intro, partly from the engine strike.

My hometown's public works department is gradually switching from GMC to Ford as trucks "die off" - I don't think they were happy with the GMC 3/4 and 1-ton trucks at all.

Rocles · June 1998

lehmann,
The S-10's are notorious for loud noises in the cab especially with the third door. Check out any review of this model and you will read what I have read. The S-10 does look better but it also scores lower in safety in both gov't and insurance tests. Seriously reconsider the Ranger. Remember that Toyota also makes a damn fine small truck.
kcram,
My town is doing the same type of changeover to Ford and Chrysler has a plant right here in Newark,DE!! Dodge guys are everywhere here plus a GM plant is five miles away. Even patonizing the local economy can only go so far.

Rocles · June 1998

Does anyone have any sales figures for the compact trucks? I'm curious of who is in the lead. Foreign and Domestic. Thanks.

Brutus · June 1998

The Ranger is, by far, the best selling small truck, but I don't know the figures. From what I can tell, the Ranger has a great overall package. However, I've heard the engine power leaves a little to be desired.

Rocles · June 1998

Our firm is now looking for a HD frame truck to put a stake body on it for light construction removal. The local Chevy dealer has a few 3500 crew-cab available with the 7.4 engine. The base payload is around 3600 pounds. I would like something closer to 4000 pounds without too much extra money. How about those Super-duty's from Ford?
I would appreciate any info or advice.

KCRam · June 1998

Roc,

If you definitely need a crew cab, grab an F450 crew cab - much higher payload, oversize (19.5") wheels, and a beam axle up front.

Brutus · June 1998

I just spoke with my dad this morning. On Friday, he returned from a trip that took him from Elkhart Indiana to Seattle and then up to Anchorage. He met up with two guys in Canada who were traveling together. Both were towing similar trailers. One had a Dodge. The other had a 99 Superduty. The Dodge could not keep up with the Superduty, especially on the long climbs.

However, before we go tooting the Ford horn too loud, it sounds like the rear ends may have played a role. The Ford had the 4.10 with the Powerstroke. The Dodge with the Cummins had a much higher rear end (maybe the 3.55?). Doesn't the Dodge offer a lower ratio?

They said that the Dodge got a little better gas mileage, but certainly not enough to compensate for the performance difference. There was no contest between the two vehicles. It's hard to tell how much of the performance difference can be attributed to the higher torque Powerstroke and how much can be attributed to the lower ratio. I suspect the rear end difference had a lot to do with it.

KCRam · June 1998

The Dodge/Cummins comes with a 3.54 standard and a 4.10 optional, and unlike Ford, limited slip is available with either ratio - I have 3.54 LS on my Ram.

The trannies may have had something to do with it too - if the Ram had the slushbox, the automatic downgrades the Cummins pretty far, while the Ford uses the same output.

Rocles · June 1998

kcram,
What kind of engine does Ford offer for the F-450? I would consider the powerstroke but am more familiar with the gas engines. Does the F-450 share the same frame of the F-350?

KCRam · June 1998

The F450 has the same engines as the F350 dually. The frame is stronger, and it uses a Dana 130 axle instead of the Dana 80 out back. The GVWR is 15,000 for the F450, so that should certainly handle any load you would want to throw on its back.

A lot of people never knew that the F-Super Duty of the old body design really was an F450 internally to Ford all these years.

Rocles · June 1998

You are correct, I didn't know that. Thanks for the info! I am heading for the Ford dealer to get some more information.

mharde2 · June 1998

Brutus, The 4.10 would have a big advantage over the 3.55 on hill climbing. It would also make a difference weather the Dodge was a 24V or not.
I think that the two diesels are very close in performance. The Ford will accelerate faster For sure. It takes the Cummins a little longer to wind up. Once up to speed the Cummins may be a little stronger. Its so close though, all boils down to personal preference I guess.

Brutus · June 1998

My dad said that almost every Dodge owner he meets on the hwy towing a fifth wheeler has the 3.55. I get the feeling that a lot of these guys are retirees. I can understand if you just take an occasional trip, but if half your miles are heavy towing miles, why wouldn't these guys opt for a 4.10? Obviously, the difference is significant. I'm with you as far as the engines being pretty equal. My dad also said that he could barely tell the Superduty was a diesel until he got real close.

By the way, my dad has a 97 F-350 Powerstroke. My dad didn't tow his fifth wheeler up to Alaska this past month. He picked up a 24 foot pull behind from a dealer in Elkhart and delivered it to a dealer in Anchorage. Normally, these dealers pay for the service, but my dad wanted to use the trailer to pick up my sister's household goods in Seattle and bring them to Alaska since she is moving up there. A guy in Anchorage has asked him to tow a trailer with a classic car on it down to Yuma Arizona later this summer. The guy is going to pay my dad's gas and a little extra. I think my dad is enjoying his semi-retirement.

Rocles · June 1998

How about the 3.73? What do you guys think about limited slip rears?

mharde2 · June 1998

The reason I opted for the 3.55 is that there are times when you have to tow in 3rd gear,(50mph head winds for example)and you turn allot of rpms doing that with a 4.10. With the 3.55 you can go all day in third if you have to. Another reason is that the 12V Cummins engins have a governer that limits the rpm to 2600rpm That comes up realy fast with the 4.10. The 24V goes to 3200rpm.
Does your dad usually tow in O/D? Sounds like he likes to drive...

cdean · June 1998

remember that the powerstroke is a v8 and the the cummins is a large bore straight 6. it is physically, mechanically natural for the v8 to be better balanced. plus more smaller cylinders translate into horsepower. really, the only thing horsepower is is speed times torque. in a certain frame of reference, horsepower is a useless number.

KCRam · June 1998

cdean,

one small flaw with your last thought. You said more smaller cylinders, referring to the V8 over the six. But if you check the cylinder size, you'll find they're not that far off. The Cummins has 59.8 cube cylinders, the Nav is 55.5 cubes. Tbat always surprised me because with so much more displacement, one would assume the Nav should destroy the Cummins is output, but they're pretty much equal there.

cdean · June 1998

that does require a hats of to cummins how they are putting out so much torque with such a relatively small total displacement. but the larger cylinder size does help. actually 4 cubic inches is more than "a little difference", in my book. it doesn't sound like much to a non mechanic who just looks at it as a percentage. a 350 has about 4 more cubic inches per cylinder than a 302 or 305, and that makes a world of torque difference.

Rocles · June 1998

cdean,
I'm bad at exact meanings. Horsepower by itself is worthless? Could you explain. I'm not being a smart-[non-permissible content removed], just a dumb one.

cdean · June 1998

i meant in certain frames of reference it is useless. horpepower is just a number of speed, and does not represent the amount of work an engine could do. what if we put up a 350 hp engine vs a 220 hp engine. which one would you rather have. the 350 hp. but what if that 350 hp engine was a 4 liter Jaguar v12 or something, and the 220 hp engine was a powerstroke. i don't think that 350 hp one would pull a horsetrailer worth a crap. horsepower is how fast your engine can "rev" up under load at a given torque.

horsepower can only be a really useful figure when you are comparing engines with similar torque figures. like two diesels, or two 5 liter engines, etc. the equation is Hp=Pi*rpm/(30*550)

the shape of an engines torque curve determines what its max horsepower is at. if and engine has peak torque at a high rpm, horsepower will peak high also and probably (not always) be higher, than a engine which peaks at lower rpms. even though the engine can't do any more actual work than one that peaks at lower rpms, it does it at higher rpms, thus the hp number is bigger.

you can take any engine and increase it's hp output on the dyno by letting it rev up another 1000 rpms. i wouldn't reccomend this, if you at all like your engine.

a good comparison of horsepower is when chevy went to the vortec engines. the 350 went up only about 10 ftlb in torque, but went up 55 horsepower. now engine was doing the same given amount of work, and it was doing it 30% faster than the previous model. now its a useful number. it shows a vast improvement in engines with similar torque curves.

to me, a true measure of an engines overall power, is how fat the torque curve is.

cdean · June 1998

i left out a term in the equation for horsepower. should be hp=torque*Pi*rpm/(30*550)

jim2 · June 1998

Kcram:

When comparing the Cummins and Nav, do you have the bore and stroke numbers? For example, I believe a Chevy 350 is just a 305 with a longer stroke. I know in off road motorcycles, a longer stroke generally means more torque given the same cylinder size. Does the Cummins have a longer stroke than the Nav?

Diesel mechanics I talk with consistently rate the Cummins higher than the Nav. They say the Cummins is easier and cheaper to repair. They also say the 12V Cummins should have the valves adjusted every 25k miles but the new 24V Cummins only needs the valves adjusted every 60K miles. I don't believe the Nav. ever needs the valves adjusted.

Dodge, Ford and Chevy all have their good and bad points. Dodge can nickel and dime you to death on little irritating stuff but everyone loves the Cummins.

Ford has had front end alignment problems on pre 1996 pickups but those with heavy towing/hauling requirements love their powerstrokes.

Chevy has had transmission problems for those who abuse their trucks but Chevy seems to have the most loved gas engine in the vortec 350 and their extended cab is the biggest of the three.

The Dodge and Ford diesels are tops. Chevys 350 consistently gets high ratings. Chevy has the biggest ext. cab, lowest 4x4 height and best 350 size gas engine. Dodge has the diesel with the best fuel mileage and almost the most pulling power and the diesel cheapest to repair. Ford has the biggest and most powerful and most expensive to repair diesel.

Dodge, Ford and Chevy all win in at least one catagory depending on what you want and what you are willing to live with.

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

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles