|
|
Item Posts
Sort Order
|
|
|
when is it time for dually?
|
|
Posted: 09/29/08
09:10 PM
|
|
i have been shopping for a truck the past few months and have decided on a 99-03 super duty diesel. but dually or not a dually? what are some things i would consider for current and future plans of owning toys that i would be towing that would tell me wether or not i need a dually?
--------------------
1975 Scout II XLC Built with used parts
1999 Diesel powered F250 Superduty Lariat
"MAN NOW IM STARVING!!!! I COULD EAT THE ASS OUT OF A NINE FOOT CHICKEN RIGHT NOW!!!
SORRY ABOUT THE CAPS JASON!!" (Rawkon)
|
|
|
|
Docfranco
Enthusiast
| Posts: 454
| Joined: 09/07
Posted: 09/29/08
09:22 PM
|
|
I would only worry about getting a dually if you want lower mileage and expect to tow a gooseneck trailer often. An f250 or f350 will handle most anything you will throw at it. That is the 7.3 right??
You sure do change your mind often....i will believe it when i see it.....
|
|
|
|
SnoMan
Addict
| Posts: 5783
| Joined: 05/04
Posted: 09/29/08
09:28 PM
|
|
Dualies are kinda over rated, They can be of some merit in a few apps but a nice solid 1 ton SRW (single rear wheel) and tow some very serious weight with right engine and axle ratio and it can carry some serious weight too with 265/75/16 load range E (rated at about 3580 lbs per tire) What this means is with these tires if you add a leaf or two two your truck it can carry some serious weight. Also with a dually, that wide rear end can be a real pain at times too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 09/30/08
08:12 AM
|
|
hey by the way diesel get between 50 and maybe 75% of the tire life you wou reg get in a gas engine, i think its a torque issue
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You know I love you all (in a manly non sexual way) Spawn_X
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 09/30/08
02:35 PM
|
|
o.k. then, looks like i won't be buying a dually
--------------------
1975 Scout II XLC Built with used parts
1999 Diesel powered F250 Superduty Lariat
"MAN NOW IM STARVING!!!! I COULD EAT THE ASS OUT OF A NINE FOOT CHICKEN RIGHT NOW!!!
SORRY ABOUT THE CAPS JASON!!" (Rawkon)
|
|
|
|
Docfranco
Enthusiast
| Posts: 454
| Joined: 09/07
Posted: 09/30/08
04:03 PM
|
|
I have never heard that, and unless you were spinning the tires (burnouts) I fail to see how the tires would know what engine was in it... 
|
|
|
|
SnoMan
Addict
| Posts: 5783
| Joined: 05/04
Posted: 09/30/08
04:22 PM
|
|
It is not exactly as someone up the thread suggested about sometimes quicker tire wear on oil burner P/U's. What is happening in average usage the front end can weigh twice as much as the rear end pushing it in a unloaded 4x4 truck and as a result the tires tend to slip a bit more going down the road and erasing them quicker. Not directly because of torque by rather weight distribution on axles.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 09/30/08
05:27 PM
|
|
i think the only thing the tires know is how much your foot is in it not how much engine is in it
--------------------
1975 Scout II XLC Built with used parts
1999 Diesel powered F250 Superduty Lariat
"MAN NOW IM STARVING!!!! I COULD EAT THE ASS OUT OF A NINE FOOT CHICKEN RIGHT NOW!!!
SORRY ABOUT THE CAPS JASON!!" (Rawkon)
|
|
|
|
SnoMan
Addict
| Posts: 5783
| Joined: 05/04
Posted: 10/01/08
05:01 AM
|
|
 manontractor:
i think the only thing the tires know is how much your foot is in it not how much engine is in it
No they know how much weight they are pushing or tractive effort being applied to them for traction they have because of weight on them. Many see only torque number and not the extra weight or than 600 Ft lbs at 1500 RPM does the same work as 300 ft lbs at 3000 rpm with proper gearing.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/01/08
10:29 AM
|
|
whatver you say man, i have been around cars my whole life and have received training thru general motors and have never heard of such a thing, you're just thinking too much. when tires are matched properly to a vehicle thru load rating and proper tire inflation they will have a healthy life span. for instance if you compare an F250 super duty with the 5.4 to the same vehicle with the power stroke, the power stroke won't wear tires any faster then the 5.4
--------------------
1975 Scout II XLC Built with used parts
1999 Diesel powered F250 Superduty Lariat
"MAN NOW IM STARVING!!!! I COULD EAT THE ASS OUT OF A NINE FOOT CHICKEN RIGHT NOW!!!
SORRY ABOUT THE CAPS JASON!!" (Rawkon)
|
|
|
|
SnoMan
Addict
| Posts: 5783
| Joined: 05/04
Posted: 10/01/08
01:34 PM
|
|
It is not that cut and dried. We were not talking about load capacity. Tell you what. Get a CTD or PS powered truck on a scale empty and you will see how heavy front end is and how light rear is pushing it and then maybe you will understand why the tires can wear out quicker and they tend to slip a bit going down the road push the heavy front end in 2wd with a lightly loaded rear axle.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/01/08
05:19 PM
|
|
the way you describe trucks is like they are a see saw / teeter totter and the front axle is the fulcrum.
--------------------
1975 Scout II XLC Built with used parts
1999 Diesel powered F250 Superduty Lariat
"MAN NOW IM STARVING!!!! I COULD EAT THE ASS OUT OF A NINE FOOT CHICKEN RIGHT NOW!!!
SORRY ABOUT THE CAPS JASON!!" (Rawkon)
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/01/08
06:02 PM
|
|
well from my expereicne you don't need a dually unless like previoulsy mentioned you pulling a really long trailer or gooseneck and such trailers, but they are more stable when towing as compared to a similar srw pickup, i actually don't mind driving my dads 2004 dogde ram 3500 4x4 diesel dually its actually kinda fun wacthing people who don't know how to drive drive by me in a narrow street, they swear my rear fenders are gonna hit them in the face but im right in my line thier just scared  but whey did you decide on FORD????  jk they are probabley great trucks im just a chevy guy 
solid axle chevys cant be beat
78 K5: 350 V8,700r4,np208, 8 lug D44 4:88, 14 bolt 10.5 4:88 with detroit locker and 35 inc parenelli jones dirt grip tires
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/01/08
06:52 PM
|
|
Geo450racer i decided on ford basically due to experience with different shop trucks and of course style but mainly with engine design and ability to run waste vegetable oil. i don't like the chevy duramax due to the injector layout and my experience with them when i worked for chevy, and we have a few super duty pickups at work one of which is a 4x4 powerstroke which i love driving.
--------------------
1975 Scout II XLC Built with used parts
1999 Diesel powered F250 Superduty Lariat
"MAN NOW IM STARVING!!!! I COULD EAT THE ASS OUT OF A NINE FOOT CHICKEN RIGHT NOW!!!
SORRY ABOUT THE CAPS JASON!!" (Rawkon)
|
|
|
|
SnoMan
Addict
| Posts: 5783
| Joined: 05/04
Posted: 10/01/08
07:21 PM
|
|
manontractor:
the way you describe trucks is like they are a see saw / teeter totter and the front axle is the fulcrum.
I have had a few on the scales and I have seen close to 5000 lbs empty on the front axle of some extend cab and crew cab trucks with diesel and less than 3000 lbs on the rear axle pushing them. Dodge had so much trouble with this weight on growing trucks with CTD;s in them they quietly scrapped using D60's and had AAM make a special solid axle based on GM 9.25 pig with bigger knuckles and ball joints than a D60 to extend service life of them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|