So about the new 1/2 Ton Diesel Ram

Curmudgeon, with regards to the air filter change cycle, are there K&N type cleanable/reusable air filters out there ? and are they considered "ok" for warranty reasons ?

Why do you guys change air filters so often? Our filter has 30k on it and still hasn't registered as a constriction on the gauge.

Fuel filters for my Ford powerstroke are $18 and take 20 minutes to change if you stop for a beer. Oil changes are even easier other than the amount of oil you're dealing with.

crankwalk wrote: If fuel is 25% higher to buy but I get 40% more fuel economy with a diesel...

OK, whatever you say.

http://www.fuelly.com/car/ford/f-150

http://www.fuelly.com/car/ford/f-250%20super%20duty

Yes, you can get K&N style filters. I know Banks makes a filter for my Ram.

Dave, have you looked at your filter? There's a serious volume of air going through these intakes, especially when the truck's working hard. Along with that air comes all sorts of dust and bugs and dirt and general crap. There's no way I'd run one to 30k.

wbjones wrote:

Sky_Render wrote:

crankwalk wrote:

Sky_Render wrote: Unless the price of diesel comes back down, there is **zero** economy benefit to a diesel truck.

False. Do the math for the gas equivilents too. It is EASY math too. Fuel is 20% more expensive for diesel and then how much MPG do you get towing with a big gas V8 (personal Example towing a datsun 240z with a 350 K5 Blazer and a 7.3 Powerstroke: 10 mpg gas VS 18MPG diesel). The fuel is slighly more more expensive and the effieciency is much higher towing. The cost difference isn't in the fuel it's the initial cost of the vehicle. Fuel aside that isnt what worries me about this truck. I have replaced my EGR and DPF on my 21k miles Jetta. The modern emmissions requirements are STIFLING these vehicles. They burn cleaner at a MUCH higher complexity and total cost of ownership later down the road.

For "EASY math," you sure aren't good at it. Around here, diesel is 80 cents more per gallon. That's 25% more to fill up. Now, unless you're towing *all the time,* you're certainly **not** going to realize that 80% increase in efficiency you just quoted. And between the increased maintenance costs of diesel (see the posts above) and the $6-8K premium on a diesel motor (depending on brand and 1/2 or 3/4 ton rating), try again with the explanation of how there's an economy benefit.

isn't that 80¢ per gallon comparing to 87 ? does the Hemi run on 87 or 93 .. around here the 93 and diesel are about the same price (couple of pennies different if any)

Again if a Hemi ram gets 15 mpg on 87 octane and a diesel ram gets 22 mpg on diesel fuel. 25% more expensive fuel but you go 40% furthur with it. The fuel costing more is NOT what makes diesels cost prohibitive. It is all the other things I have said and even with those higher initial costs, true heavy duty users that tow a lot still come out way ahead.

The delta between gas and diesel varies pretty dramatically. While gas seems to swing around, diesel is quite consistent. I've seen a delta ranging from 95 cents to about 15 cents per gallon over the last 18 months, and it's been a back and forth swing. Obviously, if you're buying a diesel simply for fuel cost savings, this is going to affect your math.

here in NC it's very consistent … at about 80-90¢ per gallon more than 87 … usually within a couple of cents of 93 …

and the question I asked earlier wasn't answered .. for some reason I thought that the Hemi required 93 … is it actually an 87 octane motor ?

Some Hemis require 89 or "midgrade."

Keith Tanner wrote: Yes, you can get K&N style filters. I know Banks makes a filter for my Ram. Dave, have you looked at your filter? There's a seriously volume of air going through these intakes, especially when the truck's working hard. Along with that air comes all sorts of dust and bugs and dirt and general crap. There's no way I'd run one to 30k.

Haven't pulled it out. There's a gauge on it that will register a drop in volume and it hasn't moved. I'll pull it out once the snow stops. I need to clean out the EGR valve while I'm at it.

Keith covered the air filter interval question. I know everybody here can rebuild an engine instantaneously with just a few harsh words, but keep in mind that not every body has mad skilz yO. For the average person yes the maintenance IS something to keep in mind.

As far as K&N's etc, I am not a fan of them even though yes I do own a few. The use of a K&N or similar will not void a warranty UNLESS a failure can be shown to be the result of that filter. Then that claim can be denied. This does not apply to the Mopar units that are available, although they are sold 'as is' with no warranty at all.

Having said that, a while back GM was specifically targeting K&N's. It seems they were getting over oiled, the oil would coat the MAF sensor hot wire and cause it to read improperly. If a MAF sensor went bad and the car had a K&N, no warranty.

Curmudgeon wrote: This does not apply to the Mopar units that are available, although they are sold 'as is' with no warranty at all.

I know a guy that knows a guy that heard from another guy that sat in a heated meeting where there might have been some engineers expressing disagreement to marketing for offering those filters in the first place.

A diesel truck mag did a comparison test between a ecodiesel 1/2 ton and a cummins 3/4. Towing through hills at 65mph, the ecodiesel did 20usmpg towing 7000lbs.

A comparable gas pickup (ecoboost, new 5.3 ecotec3, whatever) would be lucky to get 13usmpg doing that. That is huge. This truck would pay for itself by the end of the loan versus a v6 gas ram of comparable option level, and I'd have a much better tow vehicle for loads under 8000lbs, PLUS it gets good enough mpg that I could daily drive it.

I think toyman's numbers are a bit overexxagerated ( especially trying to compare a light duty vehicle to heavy duty ones) but whatever.

Now only if they would build the Aluminum F150 with the new Transit's I-5 powerstroke diesel.......

logdog wrote:

Curmudgeon wrote: This does not apply to the Mopar units that are available, although they are sold 'as is' with no warranty at all.

I know a guy that knows a guy that heard from another guy that sat in a heated meeting where there might have been some engineers expressing disagreement to marketing for offering those filters in the first place.

[Yoda] Surprised I am not. [/Yoda]

Curmudgeon wrote: Keith covered the air filter interval question. I know everybody here can rebuild an engine instantaneously with just a few harsh words, but keep in mind that not every body has mad skilz yO. For the average person yes the maintenance IS something to keep in mind. As far as K&N's etc, I am not a fan of them even though yes I do own a few. The use of a K&N or similar will not void a warranty UNLESS a failure can be shown to be the result of that filter. Then that claim can be denied. This does not apply to the Mopar units that are available, although they are sold 'as is' with no warranty at all. Having said that, a while back GM was specifically targeting K&N's. It seems they were getting over oiled, the oil would coat the MAF sensor hot wire and cause it to read improperly. If a MAF sensor went bad and the car had a K&N, no warranty.

have heard all about the over oiling thing … but aren't there some "lifetime" high flow filters out there that don't require oiling … seems I've read/heard about them … would there be any problem with them ?

wbjones wrote: here in NC it's very consistent … at about 80-90¢ per gallon more than 87 … usually within a couple of cents of 93 …

Same here for the 87/diesel spread, but 92/93 splits the difference between the two. Fr'instance, last night filling up at the truck stop (where you'd expect to find diesel cheaply) it was 3.25 for 87, 4.18 for diesel, and 3.55 for 92.

So let me get this straight, the diesel option may or may not offer a pricing or driving advantage depending on how/where you drive? Oh hell, they should have made it an option!

Ok, keep arguing guys. I'll leave you alone now, I know you enjoy it.

I've found that diesel prices tend to be fairly consistent across the country, while gasoline varies much more. I think long-haul truckers have an effect here.

This small diesel thing is a great idea. In the southwest-Asian country that I'm working in right now, we have access to all sorts of small diesel pickups--all of which I would love to take home with me. Like... a bunch of small Ford Ranger diesels are driving around all the time. When the time comes, if the price is right, I'd definitely look at this new Ram. Maybe on the used lot though.

I just think diesel trucks are cool.

Chris_V wrote:

Grizz wrote: Put it in a Dakota.

They don't make Dakotas anymore. It costs as much to make one as it does to make a full size, but theyhave to charge less for the smaller truck, so theri margins go away. Which is why it ain't gonna happen, no matter how much you'd like a mid-size truck instead. That's also why there won't be a Ranger replacement. The F150 costs the same to make but makes more of a profit.

all true … but they make ZERO $$$ from me, since they don't make mid-size PU's anymore ..

disclaimer: I do own a full size truck … bought used ..no profit to the manufacturer

wbjones wrote: disclaimer: I do own a full size truck … bought used ..no profit to the manufacturer

Sure there is... you took a used truck off of the market, so in a roundabout way, you are increasing the value of used trucks, making it more likely that someone out there will buy a new one. And if people who buy used trucks favor Brand X, then Brand X new trucks can be sold at a higher price because they command a higher resale value...

Indirect profit is still profit.