Your right that does suck. In comparison the "Duramax" sucks when compared to the Cummins. As Drew has already explained the Cummins is not even close to its maximum potiential. Just give them some more time. In that article they were talking that it would burn more fuel with the new adjustments. That means worse fuel mileage. The 6-speed could help cushion the blow if it was geared correctly, but the Duramax still isn't as reliable as the Cummins and it will never be able to defeat the Cummins low-end grunt because it is a V design in comparison to an inline design. Don't worry about it. When the Duramax was first intoduced Truck Trend found that the "Duramax" only produced 490 ft-lbs at the rear-wheels when it claimed to make 520 ft-lbs, and the Cummins that was rated at 505 supposively produced 604 ft-lbs. The cummins is often times underrated and the "Duramax" has a history of being overrated. I want to see both of them on dynos before I will consider the Cummins defeated in torque. Besides, the Cummins has more real diesel characteristics than the "Duramax" really has.