Dodge/Ram Diesel Tech Discussions on all generations of Cummins Diesel powered Rams plus the new Eco Diesel

Diesel MPGs for 3500 2008

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Mar 26, 2010 | 01:10 PM
  #1  
tedthebuilder's Avatar
tedthebuilder
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
From: New York
Default Diesel MPGs for 3500 2008

Hello All,

I'm a new member and wanted to say hello to all you Vets out there. I'm in the residential construction business, or when there was one, and have been looking at several Ram 2500 (2006) and 3500 (2008) Diesels. I prefer manual, especially with the Cummins engine. Question I have is what mileage should I realistically expect to get from a 2008, 3500 Dually, 4x4, Manual Reg Cab with 3.73 gearing? Excuse my ignorance, but learning about the change from the ever reliable 5.9 to the new 6.7 ***. (I hear the older version one can expect more than 5 miles more per gallon).

All info and advise is much appreciated.

Ted the builder.
 
Reply
Old Mar 26, 2010 | 03:01 PM
  #2  
Duroc's Avatar
Duroc
Professional
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
From: Morgan City, La
Default

My dad just went to the 6.7 after having a 5.9 for several years. He said the milage is noticablely worse when towing his 5th wheeler, about 3mpg worse. Is town or mixture of highway and town, not towing, he is getting around 17.
 
Reply
Old Mar 26, 2010 | 03:31 PM
  #3  
dirtydog's Avatar
dirtydog
Moderate User
15 Year Member
Photogenic
Photoriffic
Shutterbug
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 17,003
Likes: 21
From: Albany, NY
Default

I'll move this to the diesel section for more bites.
 
Reply
Old Mar 27, 2010 | 01:28 PM
  #4  
tedthebuilder's Avatar
tedthebuilder
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
From: New York
Default

Hey DirtyDog, hopefully I'll get a few more responses. One thing which seems to fly in the face of the EPA, is the drop in mileage for the truck. So what is the gain? Nothing.
One seems to defeat the other.

It would great to see more Biodiesel taking over the market.
 
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2010 | 08:31 PM
  #5  
dan983's Avatar
dan983
Amateur
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Default

16 around town--17 on highway at 75-80. Much better economy at 60-65 hwy.
 
Reply
Old Apr 1, 2010 | 02:32 PM
  #6  
hattitude's Avatar
hattitude
Professional
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
From: San Diego,CA
Default

Originally Posted by tedthebuilder
Hey DirtyDog, hopefully I'll get a few more responses. One thing which seems to fly in the face of the EPA, is the drop in mileage for the truck. So what is the gain? Nothing.
One seems to defeat the other.
I read an article about the emissions DPF reducing the mileage as it reduces the emissions.

The author crunched the numbers. He showed that reducing mileage by 5 mpg, about 20%, causes an increase in fuel usage. That increase in fuel used per miles driven actually negates any emissions gains and causes other negative effects. I really wish I had saved the article. I think it was in one of the diesel mags or maybe even Car & Driver.... wish I had saved it!!

Here is another discussion about mileage including the new emissions stuff.


https://dodgeforum.com/forum/dodge-c...d-mileage.html
 
Reply
Old Apr 1, 2010 | 07:24 PM
  #7  
tedthebuilder's Avatar
tedthebuilder
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
From: New York
Default

I agree with you guys. Reducing the emissions on one hand is good, but then sacrificing better fuel doesn't make any sense. Why hasn't the industry pushed for bio-diesel? That seems like a no brainer. Diesel is over $3.10 a gallon here on Long Island. The price of oil shot up today to over $85, and wait until summer when the price goes even further. Thanks for your imput. I think its safer in buying an older truck, then the newer priced diesel models.
 
Reply




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:55 PM.