1995 Chevy 6.5 L
- Thread starter kmccune
- Start date
sparkysakitas
~SPONSOR~
- Aug 31, 2005
- 1,079
- 0
go for the cummins say about 95-98 before they changed
to electric fuel pumps and get the manual trans
i had a 96 with auto tranny and that thing was a mule
and i think was rated for up to like 12,000lbs or more for towing and the running gear is super stout axles,tranny etc
to electric fuel pumps and get the manual trans
i had a 96 with auto tranny and that thing was a mule
and i think was rated for up to like 12,000lbs or more for towing and the running gear is super stout axles,tranny etc
I'd get a 93 Dodge Diesel, last year of the old body style. 94 and 95's had some quirks and more junk to rattle apart. I had a 93 3/4 4x4 sold it to my brother who currently tows a 24 foot 24,000lb rated Heavy Duty Gooseneck Equipment trailer with about 8 tons of round bales on it. The trailer alone is probably over the tow limit. The engine takes the abuse at about 250,000 miles and pulls strong!
I used a 87 6.5 Chevy Diesel and it was probably the worst pickup I have ever towed with.
If you want a little newer I had 96 Dodge Diesel, put about 100,000 with out any problems pulling Horse trailers.
Unless you want a 2000 Dodge with about 115,000 miles on it ;) On all three I could average about 18-19mpg empty. Pulled the same 5th wheel with a 1000 Gallon fertilizer tank and Averaged 8mpg over 2 days.
If I recall the Dodge HP were as follows:
1993=185hp
1996=225hp
2000=245hp
Can't recall the torque. I do know they suck ars in the snow, mud, or wet grass in 2 wheel drive, but will plow threw in 4. :cool:
I used a 87 6.5 Chevy Diesel and it was probably the worst pickup I have ever towed with.
If you want a little newer I had 96 Dodge Diesel, put about 100,000 with out any problems pulling Horse trailers.
Unless you want a 2000 Dodge with about 115,000 miles on it ;) On all three I could average about 18-19mpg empty. Pulled the same 5th wheel with a 1000 Gallon fertilizer tank and Averaged 8mpg over 2 days.
If I recall the Dodge HP were as follows:
1993=185hp
1996=225hp
2000=245hp
Can't recall the torque. I do know they suck ars in the snow, mud, or wet grass in 2 wheel drive, but will plow threw in 4. :cool:
sparkysakitas
~SPONSOR~
- Aug 31, 2005
- 1,079
- 0
sometimes deals are not best option
(i know got a basket case ford from parents)
was good deal but :bang: stupid fords :yell:
(i know got a basket case ford from parents)
was good deal but :bang: stupid fords :yell:
Broken Spoke
Member
- Mar 1, 2004
- 62
- 0
I think that the non-turbo chevys were 6.2L, but I know that you don't want it. I will have the agree about the Cummins. I have a 96 Dodge Cummins with about 260,000 miles on it and it will still pull a house down. My brother had a 92 Cummins with over 400,000 miles on it when his wife totaled it. The engine from that truck is now a well motor sitting in the middle of a rice field.
Broken Spoke
Member
- Mar 1, 2004
- 62
- 0
One thing that I left out of my post is that you should get a manual transmission. In my opinion, an automatic transmission doesn't belong behind a diesel. I do not drive a Dodge because it is a Dodge. I drive it because of the Cummins.
we have a '95 dodge cummins and my dads friend has a '94 6.5 they are both 2500's and 2wd and ext. cabs.The cummins will out pull it on hills all day long. We were towing are campers to Portland In. for a cushman and vespa show and we left him in the dust. We also have a '97 dodge cummins that will be for sale soon.....
bsmith said:
Never happen.
I believe Dodge and Cummins have signed an agreement to work together for quite a few years to come. Ford and International/Navistar have similar relationships.
Personally, I'm disappointed they got rid of the 7.3L Power Stroke in favor of the smaller, higher-revving 6.0L model.
Broken Spoke
Member
- Mar 1, 2004
- 62
- 0
Before 1997 and the powersmoke, the Ford diesels were heaps too!
- Dec 26, 1999
- 19,765
- 1
Gota' watch some of the late 7.3's as they went to powered metal rods and they just didn't stand up to the power adding that many people tried.
I've got 114K on my May 2000 7.3 (forged rods thank you very much) with 6 speed and consistantly get 18.5-20.5 MPG combined and have seen 23 MPG when on long interstate runs. I've been very conservative only adding a light programmer flash and 4" stainless turbo back exhaust along with durability upgrades like bypass oil filtration, the gold coolant change, LuK clutch assy, Ultra Duty diff cover and all synthetic lubes. It's been a great truck and while not quite as long lived as the Cummins the overall package is much better then the wrapper and attached pieces on the Cummins :)
I've got 114K on my May 2000 7.3 (forged rods thank you very much) with 6 speed and consistantly get 18.5-20.5 MPG combined and have seen 23 MPG when on long interstate runs. I've been very conservative only adding a light programmer flash and 4" stainless turbo back exhaust along with durability upgrades like bypass oil filtration, the gold coolant change, LuK clutch assy, Ultra Duty diff cover and all synthetic lubes. It's been a great truck and while not quite as long lived as the Cummins the overall package is much better then the wrapper and attached pieces on the Cummins :)
Very true, Patman.
The 2001 & upo 7.3L Power Strokes shouldn't be pushed over about 330hp with the PM rods. The earlier forged rod engines can take substantially more power. With that said, a 7.3L PM rod engine that is chipped to 325hp is still plenty strong (and will get great mileage to boot).
It's true the earlier IDI engines weren't as good as the later Power Strokes, but they were still decent engines.
As far as being long-lived, my understanding is that both the Cummins and the 7.3L International (the Power Stroke is an International motor with Ford electronics on it) are both rated at 350,000 miles (I don't remember if it was the 50% or 10% rebuild level, but both were rated the same).
The 2001 & upo 7.3L Power Strokes shouldn't be pushed over about 330hp with the PM rods. The earlier forged rod engines can take substantially more power. With that said, a 7.3L PM rod engine that is chipped to 325hp is still plenty strong (and will get great mileage to boot).
It's true the earlier IDI engines weren't as good as the later Power Strokes, but they were still decent engines.
As far as being long-lived, my understanding is that both the Cummins and the 7.3L International (the Power Stroke is an International motor with Ford electronics on it) are both rated at 350,000 miles (I don't remember if it was the 50% or 10% rebuild level, but both were rated the same).
I would go with a 94 to 98 CTD 12 VALVE. Make sure you get the 5spd, that automatic is a POS. These are argueably the best motor cummins ever made. The newer 98.5 to 02 i believe have serious fuel problems. If you don't have a gauge and are constantly paying attention you will lose your lifter pump with a snap of your fingers. And that is not something you want to replace.
I personally have a 96 Dodge Ram 2500 CTD and it is the best tow vehicle i have ever owned. It gets good mileage not towing (close to 20) and while towing (11-13). The only thing i don't like is that i didn't get the 1ton for that extra kick.
My previous tow rig was a 1994 Ford IDI 7.3l non turbo diesel. I would not mind getting one of these again. That motor is a tank !
I personally have a 96 Dodge Ram 2500 CTD and it is the best tow vehicle i have ever owned. It gets good mileage not towing (close to 20) and while towing (11-13). The only thing i don't like is that i didn't get the 1ton for that extra kick.
My previous tow rig was a 1994 Ford IDI 7.3l non turbo diesel. I would not mind getting one of these again. That motor is a tank !
sparkysakitas
~SPONSOR~
- Aug 31, 2005
- 1,079
- 0
yeah they went to a electric fuel pump after 98, and they are only rated for x amount of hours before they smoke themselves
Broken Spoke
Member
- Mar 1, 2004
- 62
- 0
I have the 12 valve CTD with a 5 speed and one of my brothers has a new high output CTD with a six speed. My old 12 valve will eat that high output up in any situation leaving him in my cloud of black smoke!
- Jul 3, 1999
- 2,726
- 1
- Thread starter
- #23
:ohmy: I'm so confused!I think I'll stick with Ford due to "wrapping " problems that I have had with the Mopar products I've had in the past. Maybe not an issue but I hate repair bills and Mopar has given me more then Chevy and then Ford. It dosn't sound like a lot of people like the Chevys diesels?
