In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Damn EPA
SW 357Mag
Member Posts: 1,960 ✭✭✭✭✭
I own two Dodge 4x4 diesel trucks. A 98 model and a new 07 model.
The 98 model gets 18-19 mpg, driving relatively easy with a little playing.
The early 07's still had the ol reliable 5.9L Cummins without all the epa junk on it. These trucks will still get 17-19 mpg on average, with some getting even better.
The 07 I own is a late model with the 6.7L Cummins. This truck meets the regulations for 2010 set by the EPA. I can get 13 mpg if I BABY the truck, driving it as lightly as possible. Let me also mention that there are kits now to remove the dpf filter and egr and all that nonsense, and make it a real truck again. I have heard of people gaining up to 8 mpg by removing this garbage. I myself have witnessed a 5 mpg increase by doing it, although it was not my truck. I'm going to be doing it just as soon as the money is there, wont take long to pay for itself with the diesel prices.
Anyway, someone please explain to me how it is better for the environment to be burning all that extra fuel? It doesn't make a damn bit of sense to me.
The 98 model gets 18-19 mpg, driving relatively easy with a little playing.
The early 07's still had the ol reliable 5.9L Cummins without all the epa junk on it. These trucks will still get 17-19 mpg on average, with some getting even better.
The 07 I own is a late model with the 6.7L Cummins. This truck meets the regulations for 2010 set by the EPA. I can get 13 mpg if I BABY the truck, driving it as lightly as possible. Let me also mention that there are kits now to remove the dpf filter and egr and all that nonsense, and make it a real truck again. I have heard of people gaining up to 8 mpg by removing this garbage. I myself have witnessed a 5 mpg increase by doing it, although it was not my truck. I'm going to be doing it just as soon as the money is there, wont take long to pay for itself with the diesel prices.
Anyway, someone please explain to me how it is better for the environment to be burning all that extra fuel? It doesn't make a damn bit of sense to me.
Comments
Though I've always wondered how well they work after years of use. Anyone actually ever replace the charcal filters??
I own two Dodge 4x4 diesel trucks. A 98 model and a new 07 model.
The 98 model gets 18-19 mpg, driving relatively easy with a little playing.
The early 07's still had the ol reliable 5.9L Cummins without all the epa junk on it. These trucks will still get 17-19 mpg on average, with some getting even better.
The 07 I own is a late model with the 6.7L Cummins. This truck meets the regulations for 2010 set by the EPA. I can get 13 mpg if I BABY the truck, driving it as lightly as possible. Let me also mention that there are kits now to remove the dpf filter and egr and all that nonsense, and make it a real truck again. I have heard of people gaining up to 8 mpg by removing this garbage. I myself have witnessed a 5 mpg increase by doing it, although it was not my truck. I'm going to be doing it just as soon as the money is there, wont take long to pay for itself with the diesel prices.
Anyway, someone please explain to me how it is better for the environment to be burning all that extra fuel? It doesn't make a damn bit of sense to me.
I have the 5.9 and see over 21 MPG all the time, I can get over 22 on the highway. The 6.7 Cummins is a lot more motor, delivering more power and torque. All that power and torque takes fuel. The ULSD mandated by the EPA has caused a lot of headaches. The old farm Diesel with higher sulphur content is no longer even made. A turbo diesel with a straight pipe out the back will be the most efficient.