What a Joke

[Bird]

Just a bit of advice, 20,000 miles isn't really even broken in yet. See what happens after 100K

I've owned over a dozen Fords used in commercial applications-plowing, construction, dumps, etc. Most were good, but they do break at the worst possible times.

I agree that 20k is just getting started, but I recently (12/8/07) rented a U-Haul 14' truck to help a daughter and her husband move. The truck was an F350. I didn't notice what year model it was, but I was surprised to see that it had 154k miles on it.

 

[rback33]

Most were good, but they do break at the worst possible times.

Don't they all?

 

[Diamondpilot]

You are right, they all break at the worst possible time, thats Murphy's law. If I am trying to go somewhere and it does not work, its the worst possible time. If I am trying to take a shower and the well pump fails, that the worst possible time. You cant schedule failures, they just happen.

Lets face it if you drive a Ford you think its the best. Same for GM, Dodge, Toyota, Nissan, ect. You would not buy a Dodge if you think the GM is better...

Chris

 

[tlbuser]

I pull a 30 foot goose neck trailer that is 6000 lbs empty, my trailer gross weight is actually in the 11,000 plus category.

Why are you using a 30 foot, 6000lb. trailer for ~a 5000 lb. load?

 

[jcmseven]

Builder,

Thanks for the advice. I do realize that 20,000 miles is not much on any unproven diesel, but as we both know, many times quality-related issues start early in the life of anything mechanical. I just managed to limp my dad's 206,000 mile f150 down to the recyling center, it ran fine, smooth (and gets almost 20 mpg!!!) I got some tires for it today, but due to its being a Ford I told the tire dealer to not give me tires that would last that long. It made it back OK though...another opportunity for disaster averted. If this 6.4 does that well, I would say it passed the test. At the rate I am currently driving it I should be there in 2015. Assuming at that point we can afford to drive (and by then we should both have over 10,000 posts--halfway to Bird) we can then discuss further whether it broke or not. Until then, it has proven a fine truck and a vast improvement over my 2002 model in almost every way. I think your experience has mainly also been with the previous generation. Am I correct about that, or have you owned a new one??


John M

 

[crashz]

I've owned late model Ford and GM 1/2 ton 4x4s that have been just flat out great trucks. They have logged well over 100K miles, towed, plowed snow, gotten stuck and unstuck with force, hauled and generally abused. They one caviot is that they were well maintained. I'm sure that would be the case with all of the manufactures.


One thing I would like to point out is that none of my 1/2 ton trucks are very comfortable doing tasks at the maximum GVW or GCVW. They are fine for occasionally towing (actually all have felt overworked at half the rated trailer load!), but putting 10K behind any 1/2 ton and towing a distance will just be a bad time. Its the owner's responsibility to pick the right size truck for the load, conditions and frequency of use.

 

[Builder]

Builder,

Thanks for the advice. I do realize that 20,000 miles is not much on any unproven diesel, but as we both know, many times quality-related issues start early in the life of anything mechanical. I just managed to limp my dad's 206,000 mile f150 down to the recyling center, it ran fine, smooth (and gets almost 20 mpg!!!) I got some tires for it today, but due to its being a Ford I told the tire dealer to not give me tires that would last that long. It made it back OK though...another opportunity for disaster averted. If this 6.4 does that well, I would say it passed the test. At the rate I am currently driving it I should be there in 2015. Assuming at that point we can afford to drive (and by then we should both have over 10,000 posts--halfway to Bird) we can then discuss further whether it broke or not. Until then, it has proven a fine truck and a vast improvement over my 2002 model in almost every way. I think your experience has mainly also been with the previous generation. Am I correct about that, or have you owned a new one??


John M

I go back to the mid 80'sd with Ford. Started with several 351 & 460 powered F-350 4x4's, went to F-350's w/7.3L N'A's and a couple early Powerstrokes. My last 3 Ford Superduties were (2) 7.3L F-350 4x4's and 1 F-450 4x4. Not bad trucks, but the transmissions were pathetic. After GM introduced the Allison medium duty trans and an 11.5" true locker behind the DMAX, I knew Ford's days with me were numbered. I switched and I won't go back until Ford steps up with a tougher driveline and the 6.4L gets 3-5 years of proven service under it. Then I'll consider a Ford again. I can't take a chance on an unproven new diesel and another glorified Ford car transmission. I like the fact that DC is also offering an Aisin M/D tranny and you can't beat a Cummins.

Good luck with your truck. A 6.4L success story only makes em all better.

 

[jcmseven]

Builder,

Glad to see there still might be hope of pulling you back to the Blue Oval. I can understand your conservatism, but I think after some time on the road it seems Ford has a winner with the 6.4L engine. As you and I know, in its current trim it is conservatively tuned, and capable of much more power. The curve here is tremendous. I agree that the Allison transmission is a nice one, but if I recall, not rated for any more torque than the Torqshift. In fact, in conversations I have had with some aftermarket engineers, they have found the slippage rate rate at higher outputs more of a problem with the Allison than the Torqshift (in previous renditions of both transmissions). That said, it still is a stout transmission and the additional gear is nice to have I am sure. Aside from the transmission and rear axle, areas where I feel GM has an edge, the driveshaft and other frame, braking and suspension components on the Ford are markedly upgraded from earlier models. It is a tank of a truck and much more heavily-made than my 2002 model. I am not trying to get this topic more off target than it already is, but if your original statement about breakage is mainly based off the previous generation of these trucks--which were durable but utilitarian--you may wish to reconsider that notion. There is not much that will break easily on this one. Ford has also proven to be very friendly about routine service, etc. I know in the past we have discussed the longer powertrain warranty on the GM product. While this is true, it seems it would be more-helpful if certain GM dealers honored it. My good friend, a very reputable person and the owner of a new 2500 GMC with the Duramax/Allison combo 365/650 has had four unscheduled service trips, three injector related and one electrical. On each of the engine-related issues, the dealer refused to service his truck under warranty, citing "bad fuel" as the cause for his problem. Intriguingly, we ALWAYS (except when traveling which we have neither done recently) buy our fuel at the same place. My friend negotiated one repair under warranty but has now invested over $2500.00 in repairs on his less than 12K mile truck. His last inquiry was met with the ol' "corporate policy" statement. I heard about this as he slummed his way to his house in the passenger seat of the King Ranch. He is a generally very nice person and I honestly felt badly for him. I do not know if it is the dealer--who has a good reputation--or truly company policy on this item. What I do know is his beautiful black truck has nowhere near 100,000 miles on it (heck, not even Ford's puny 60,000 mile either). Perhaps we will make contact in a year or two and place your order. Truly--all jest aside-- I do understand your point and agree that the conservative route is usually best.

John M

 

[jcmseven]

One more thing...in my previous post my point is not that my friend's truck is not a good one. It has run well aside from this nagging issue which has required more than one dealer trip. Anything can happen to any truck of any brand at any time. My concern is he has been less than pleased with the response he has gotten about service issues on his $50,000+ vehicle. Aside from a ZO6 Corvette and scattered Caddies, I think a fully laden GMC/Chevy diesel pickup is about the most-expensive vehicle sold by the General. I personally think he should have been treated better. I know that Ford had similar problems with the 6.0L, where many times customers were blamed for issues which were design-related. I hope that GM does not fall into the same boat and learned something from Ford here. I have had no issues with my truck to test the theory, but have been told by Ford service folks I know their mandate has been to fix problems and not ask questions. They seem to want these trucks to be successful. This is one aspect where in most--but not all-instances Toyota shines. Toyota has laid its fair share of automotive eggs, but in general they handle things well enough to satisfy their customers and keep them coming back.

John M

 

[Builder]

Since you seem to be concentrating on engines, the 6.4L engine is still largely unproven. The DMAX is totally proven. On another website I belong to, there's a member with a DMAX that makes 1,000 rear wheel HP. No Ford diesel, not a 7.3L, 6L or 6.4L has come close to that.

An Allison 1000 series transmission is a true medium duty 6 speed transmission used in larger medium duty applications (like Ford F-650's)than the Ford torqshift 5 speed transmisson. It also has a manual shift feature not found on the torqshift.

Did you ever ask yourself why Ford uses a very similar Allison transmission in their Ford medium duty trucks, like the F-650, but they don't use their own in-house Torqshift in the F-650? If the Torqshift is so tough, like an Allison, I wonder why they don't use them??????

The 11.5" rear axle in the GM is much stouter than the Ford 10.5" l/s rear. It also locks quicker and stays locked

Now the last time I drove a truck, the main thing that drives it is the engine, transmission and rear axle....... they're the heart & soul of a truck. Nice to have 5 REAL proportional gauges instead of idiot-light gauges to monitor that heart & soul, too. That's where I want my money-in the components that take the abuse whenever the truck is running -not a front axle that rarely sees any service.

IMO, Ford's advantages help a much lower percentage of their owners- like snow plowers, hard core off-roaders, guys who need more front axle. That's where Ford has the edge. I'd say 90% of the guys who own Ford & GM trucks barely ever engage them in 4x4 not to mention plow snow or go hard core off roading. Also you have to realize there's a lot of 4x2 trucks out there making the Ford advantage in the front end even less significant.

Let's face it, most diesel truck 4x4 guys don't even need a truck, not to mention a diesel 4x4. For a lot of guys, it's just a lack of masculinity compensation issue. I really need a diesel 4x4 pickup. I use it to tow and carry lots of tools & lumber for a construction business, not tow a 1,500lb Cub Cadet lawn mower or look cute.

Like you said, we're off topic, so let's just say buy what makes the most sense for you......'nuff said.

 

[RollingsFarms]

I use it to tow and carry lots of tools & lumber for a construction business


I do this all day long on my farm with a 2004 Z71. so do 90% of the farmers around me. mostly the folks you see driving diesels(that ive seen) are women and a few teenage boys. i doubt i'll ever need a 3/4 or 1 ton diesel. my 1/2 ton Z71 5.3 does all i need and more. as i'm sure you're aware, farm work can take a real toll on a truck, as can the construction business.

 

[Builder]

I use it to tow and carry lots of tools & lumber for a construction business


I do this all day long on my farm with a 2004 Z71. so do 90% of the farmers around me. mostly the folks you see driving diesels(that ive seen) are women and a few teenage boys. i doubt i'll ever need a 3/4 or 1 ton diesel. my 1/2 ton Z71 5.3 does all i need and more. as i'm sure you're aware, farm work can take a real toll on a truck, as can the construction business.

I prefer the feel of pulling 11-12K off the bumper with a 3500 diesel over a 1500 gasser. A 1/2 ton is a stretch for a loaded utility body, too.

 

[RollingsFarms]

I prefer the feel of pulling 11-12K off the bumper with a 3500 diesel over a 1500 gasser. A 1/2 ton is a stretch for a loaded utility body, too.

cant say i blame you

 

[Diamondpilot]

I do agree that Ford lacks GM on the current HP Torque war but they lead both GM and Dodge in every other category like GVWR's, GCVWR's, and tow ratings. As for the trannys in Fords, I have owned 10 or more in the last 10 years, usually 4 vehicles at a time, and have never had a single tranny problem. I use my trucks hard in my marine business. We tow boats that range from 6,000# to 25,000# and more with out a single problem. We have broke hitches, bent draw bars but never a single drive line problem. Now my 2500 Hemi Dodge was a different story, it had 2 tranny operations before the warranty was up then quickly traded on a Ford.


Chris

 

[Builder]

I do agree that Ford lacks GM on the current HP Torque war but they lead both GM and Dodge in every other category like GVWR's, GCVWR's, and tow ratings. As for the trannys in Fords, I have owned 10 or more in the last 10 years, usually 4 vehicles at a time, and have never had a single tranny problem. I use my trucks hard in my marine business. We tow boats that range from 6,000# to 25,000# and more with out a single problem. We have broke hitches, bent draw bars but never a single drive line problem. Now my 2500 Hemi Dodge was a different story, it had 2 tranny operations before the warranty was up then quickly traded on a Ford.


Chris

That's funny. I probably towed less than you (mostly a 11K trailer) but spent over $10,000 repairing & upgrading Ford transmissions in the last 15 years. IMO, they made brutally bad transmissions. My Ford dealer has them in stock lined up on the garage floor waiting to be installed. In the early 2000's I swore Ford was making more money selling truck trannys than selling trucks. The torqshift is a step in the right direction, but I know a few expert transmission builders, like BTS who say they're only marginally better. They also say not as good as an Allison, no way.

I mean, why does Ford put an Allison tranny, like the one in my GM pickup in their F-650 medium duty? Why not the Torqshift if it's so great?

How about warranty....you know, how long the manufacturer thinks the truck is worth repairing, free of charge for the customer? How does that speak for GM's faith in their product compared to Ford's shorter warranty?

 

[Robert_in_NY]

Builder, I can't say which tranny's exactly but the two tranny shops here both say they had more work repairing GM trannys since 2000. I was surprised as I thought Dodge would give them the most work. But Ford gave them the least. Now as I said, I do not know how many of each particular truck transmission as they lumped all full size trucks together when they talk about them.

The Allison tranny may be a great one but I don't know as I don't have a use for a truck that size just yet. But if Ford's Tourqshift tranny isn't failing on a regular basis for the type of work it is designed then what is the problem with it? Now if the people running them are overloading them and abusing them on a regular basis then it is their own fault.

And which transmission was it that Ford and GM built together a few years back? Was it one of the truck or car trannys?

 

[bota7800]

I apologize for going ON topic:

Toyota is a major sponsor of the National Western Stock Show in Denver and therefore have a prime display area (that, incidentally, was always a Chevy display until the last couple years).

At the display they had a bare chassis. I didn't look at it much as I am not in the market but it looked fairly substantial. What surprised me was that they had a Tundra dually on display. I assume it is a custom and not a commercial offering.

 

[jcmseven]

Builder,

I am in no way saying GM does not make a good product. I do not wish this point to be lost. I take issue with the comment that originally got this thread within a thread started. I have no doubt as to your experience with hauling machines and heavier duty trucks than that which I own. I do think, though, that the innuendo given--in this post with sentiment in others--was that Fords somehow break easier than GM's and this simply is not the case. Both are fine machines and I feel this position may have been based on one of the older trucks used. In this post, the examples you use are valid, but relatively few in number. GM does have a heavy duty transmission, but I have found no one in my area, either towing or wrenching that feels it substantially more durable or functional than the Torqshift. GM does have a heavier rear axle. The drive shaft on my truck is actually larger in diameter/circumference than my friend's GMC--though I do not know if that translates into the larger models. GM has an extra gear with the trannie--which is really nice; but it takes about five minutes on a service dolly to see that Ford has a solidly built and heavy duty truck. It has a heavier duty suspension/front axle/control arms/steering assembly/brakes, etc. The frame is heavier and has a full bulkhead enclosure--which I think is currently exclusive (at least as of last year). It is also a much heavier truck, based on curb weight. My position based on this is that a Ford truck is no more likely to leave one stranded with a load or on a job than is a GM product. And for what its worth, my "idiot gauges" never seem to vary from dead center, so a difference of 200 degrees v. 205 is not that material for me. The power towing mirrors, back up camera to accurately line up your trailer (does GM have these??) and tailgate step are. The trailer brake controller, which GM liked so much it copied it, is also nice. It is also the case that for 2008 MY the truck is upgraded substantially v. previous renditions and lest we forget, they in all were pretty durable machines, albeit spartan. I read into your post the implication that perhaps I and others such as me do not use their trucks as a diesel "should be used" and that you do. While I have no doubt you use your truck fully, I do as well so I feel no less credible in saying pulling right at the limit for weight when I pull, it does great. Stable as a rock and good power--and no, even though I do not pull often I do not feel for my current needs a half ton would do it safely for me--thus why I kept my truck (even though I still cannot fit it into the parking garage at work). It is true that currently there are no 1000 HP 6.4L's out there--I thought the poster you mention had a Dodge--but I could be wrong there--but you and I both know that big HP 6.4L's are coming. Twin turbos, and a block and engine assembly that heavily made logically speaks to more power by aftermarketeers. Remember it is UNPROVEN (your statement), which means it is new--give them some time and the natural thermodynamic improvements harbored by such a design will support mods for those that wish to. I am not trying to sell you on Ford, or anyone else for that matter. I really have no interest in getting anyone to buy the truck I have. I do have an interest in letting folks know that I have one and it is a whopping improvement over previous models. Our OP and the intent of the thread was discussing the liablities of high capacity half ton's v. 3/4 ton trucks or heavier. This inevitably leads to X truck will do this; Y truck that, etc. I have no doubt that a Toyota 1/2 ton can safely pull 10,300 pounds; I also have no doubt that my Ford is very UNLIKELY be "Ford Tough--until it breaks." (1999 model??) It will break sometime, but I doubt any sooner than any other make.
Also, since GM sold its medium duty lineup (I read 4500 and up) to NAVISTAR, what are we going to do? I have read that Isuzu will continue to supply the Duramax through 2008 but after that it might be a, gulp, 6.4L as an option(???) I hope that's not true because then we we cannot discuss the 4500/5500 topics in the same light.

John M

 

[jcmseven]

Bota7800,

Word has it that Toyota will offer a dually with an 8.0L Hino diesel and six speed Eaton transmission, NOT an Allison, in 1-2 years. It will be rated at 300 hp and 600 pound feet of torque in initial form, likely more based on current competition. I have seen a picture. It looks a little funny but was unpainted to give it the industial look, so with paint it might look fine.

John M

 

[jcmseven]

DiamondPilot,

I am not 100% sure that Ford is really behind in the torque/HP wars, although I know you speak of advertised power. On paper it is, but some of the testing may show otherwise. Most articles I have seen have shown unloaded the GM products to be faster unloaded, both in 0-60 and 1/4 mile testing. I direct these testers to the Tow/Haul switch on the shift column. When engaged, the Ford truck accelerates much faster than when in "D". The articles I have seen suggest that the 2008 model Ford's lose less when towing than do the other makes out right now. Specifically v. GM, the towing times for similar loads with similar axle ratios are EXTREMELY close, this is despite the average curb weight of the Ford product being 1000+ pounds more than the equivalent GM and working with one less gear and similar axle ratios (and in many cases taller/larger wheels/tires). This suggests that the GM product has less power than advertised or the Ford has more, or both. From my personal experience, my friend's 2500 GMC is faster than my 250 without Tow Haul engaged. With it engaged, we will run a dead heat, all the way to speed limiter (no mods on either yet). The truck that wins is the one with the better "jump." (I do not advocate doing this--desolate road, no traffic). Our trucks are geared the same and his is six speeds, mine five in the trannie. Mine weighes approximately 1,100 pounds more than his, based on scaled weight. I do know that power is not the only criteria for acceleration but it is an easy way to roughly gauge. I recall an article from "Truck Trends" back when the Duramax first came out. It was tested v. a Ford and Dodge. The trucks were dynoed and the Chevy calculated very close to advertised power. The Dodge and Ford (7.3L) were grossly UNDERrated. This might still hold true. I would bet that if one were to dyno 10 trucks of each make or diesel pickup with similar chassis and driveshaft lengths/mileages on a chassis dyno, the "big three" are really within five HP of one another and probably the same on torque. Also, Ford and Dodge are not going to let the General get any edge, nor vice versa, so I suspect they know something we don't. You bring up a very interesting point.

John M