KYSkipper Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 and you think Ford should be held liable when a customer uses aftermarket parts that screw up the truck? Lets get something very straight here. 1. This truck was screwed up before I ever tried out the tuner. 2. It had been attempted to be fixed for over 12 months and numerous visits to the shop before this was ever tried. I was told by both the technician and Ford engineer that neither one of them knew what to do to solve the problems with my engine. The engineer suggested that a tuner might help. 3. One of the first things Ford did to this truck when they recalled it was reduce the power by recalibrating the computer. When they got done with it, the truck I paid for and the one I had were 2 complete different things. 4. The problems with this truck were not created by the tuner nor were they solved and I removed it after a short testing period when I realized it didn't solve the problem. 5. Now 2 and a half year from the initial problem and the original problems are still there and have yet to be solved. 6. Knowing that Ford has issued several dozen updated recalibrations for the 6.0's computers it is evident to about anyone that Ford itself really has no idea how to program the beast they built. The software issued by Ford is about as dependable as Microsoft Windows and has been updated about as much as Microsoft has updated it's operating system. 7. There is no headgasket damage or leaking headgaskets or any similar problem on my truck that would be indicative of using a programmer to run it beyond it's limits. The problems have been in the EGR system and turbo system since day one of problems and nothing so far has fixed it. You are barking up the wrong tree blaming me for this mess. I'm just someone who got stuck with a bad apple and is evidently going to have to live with it. Ford could have fixed this mess 2 years ago, but would not, and they still refuse. I hardly see how someone could be blamed for attempting to fix their problem when they have given ample opportunity to Ford to fix it then are told that Ford's best don't know how to fix it. What else could be expected? Skipper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluecon Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 yea, right :gang: More than 1.2 seconds faster to 60mph. "Duramax dominance Big numbers on paper don't always translate directly to the pavement, but in this case the Silverado backed up its spec sheet. At the test track, the 7,420-pound Chevrolet ran from zero to 60 in just 8.4 seconds and crossed the quarter-mile in 16.5 seconds at 83.1 mph. Those numbers not only leave the Ford (9.6, 17.1) and Dodge (10.1, 17.4) sucking diesel smoke, they're in the range of several midsize SUVs we've tested recently. Hitching up the big Axis trailer was the real test, however, and the Silverado walked away from the Dodge and Ford there, too. With the trailer in tow and over a ton of bricks in the bed, the Chevrolet maintained the highest average speed up the pass and covered the 12-mile distance nearly a minute faster than both the Dodge and Ford. On the steepest sections of the grade (up to 7.2 percent), the Silverado was the only truck that could maintain constant acceleration. It also delivered the best overall fuel economy for the climb at 7.3 mpg." Why would you buy the Ford for a work truck? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprinter Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 More than 1.2 seconds faster to 60mph. "Duramax dominance Big numbers on paper don't always translate directly to the pavement, but in this case the Silverado backed up its spec sheet. At the test track, the 7,420-pound Chevrolet ran from zero to 60 in just 8.4 seconds and crossed the quarter-mile in 16.5 seconds at 83.1 mph. Those numbers not only leave the Ford (9.6, 17.1) and Dodge (10.1, 17.4) sucking diesel smoke, they're in the range of several midsize SUVs we've tested recently. Hitching up the big Axis trailer was the real test, however, and the Silverado walked away from the Dodge and Ford there, too. With the trailer in tow and over a ton of bricks in the bed, the Chevrolet maintained the highest average speed up the pass and covered the 12-mile distance nearly a minute faster than both the Dodge and Ford. On the steepest sections of the grade (up to 7.2 percent), the Silverado was the only truck that could maintain constant acceleration. It also delivered the best overall fuel economy for the climb at 7.3 mpg." Why would you buy the Ford for a work truck? the ford was carrying over 1200 pounds extra over what the chevy was loaded according to the article. In order to even the playing field, we loaded up each truck based on a percentage of its maximum rating. But instead of using maximum tow ratings, we based our calculations on each truck's Gross Combined Weight Rating (GCWR). Unlike tow ratings, which don't always take into consideration all the factors involved, GCWR includes everything. We're talking the truck, the driver, all passengers, optional equipment, fuel, cargo in the bed and the trailer. With a GCWR of 21,000 pounds, the Dodge Ram had the lowest overall rating. Adding the weight of our test trailer, along with passengers, fuel, etc., put the Dodge at 81 percent of its GCWR. With a GCWR of 23,500 pounds, the Chevrolet Silverado needed a little help to get to the 81 percent mark so we added 2,440 pounds of cinder blocks. Serious rear-end gears gave the Ford the highest GCWR at 26,600 pounds, requiring an extra 3,700 pounds of cinder blocks. This didn't even the playing field by loading different weights into each truck. Put an extra 1000 pounds into any car/truck and see how the numbers change going up a steep grade. The test was a joke. If you like your chevy so much go to work for GM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluecon Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 the ford was carrying over 1200 pounds extra over what the chevy was loaded according to the article.This didn't even the playing field by loading different weights into each truck. Put an extra 1000 pounds into any car/truck and see how the numbers change going up a steep grade. The test was a joke. If you like your chevy so much go to work for GM. The Ford was carrying no extra weight in the acceleration runs, only on the uphill. And even with the3.73 to 4.3 gears and no extra weight the GM smoked the Ford. I have worked for GM, Ford and Chrysler.(quit your whining) That has nothing to do with the fact that GM has a much superior diesel in these trucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprinter Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 The Ford was carrying no extra weight in the acceleration runs, only on the uphill. And even with the3.73 to 4.3 gears and no extra weight the GM smoked the Ford.I have worked for GM, Ford and Chrysler.(quit your whining) That has nothing to do with the fact that GM has a much superior diesel in these trucks. Then go back there, if you think it's soooo superior. Everyone here at ford would be glad to see you go. Are you just mad because they make you park your non ford truck out in the boonies and you have to walk so far? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluecon Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 Then go back there, if you think it's soooo superior. Everyone here at ford would be glad to see you go. Are you just mad because they make you park your non ford truck out in the boonies and you have to walk so far? Is that your best response. Nothing but childish whining. I don't work at Ford. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprinter Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 Is that your best response.Nothing but childish whining. I don't work at Ford. Well surprise surprise surprise. Let me guess, they (ford) fired your worthless butt long ago? Do we have a little grudge against fords? If the testers were careful to evaluate the trucks by adding different amounts of weight, why didn't they add 760 pounds to the chevy to make all the curb weights the same. That would be more than enough weight to kill the 0.6 seconds (oooooh really smoking) win of the chevy. The test was a joke and so are you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KYSkipper Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 GM has a much superior diesel in these trucks. That is truly sad. Ford went how many years having a diesel light years ahead of Chevy? Chevy always had the poorest reputation in the diesel engine business until Ford came up with the 6.0 diesels. They should have took whatever they spent on R&D and Warranty claims on the 6.0 and gave it to the politicians so we could still get a 7.3 diesel. Skipper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluecon Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 Well surprise surprise surprise. Let me guess, they (ford) fired your worthless butt long ago? Do we have a little grudge against fords? If the testers were careful to evaluate the trucks by adding different amounts of weight, why didn't they add 760 pounds to the chevy to make all the curb weights the same. That would be more than enough weight to kill the 0.6 seconds (oooooh really smoking) win of the chevy. The test was a joke and so are you. No Ford never fired me. I do believe the company has had totally incompetent management for the last several years and the sales/profit figures bear that out. If you need to stick your head in the sand and pretend the Ford 6.0l diesel is better than the GM competition feel free to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.