Might this be because there are more diesel trucks than gas trucks? As noted:
so as an example, if there are lots of 3/4ton (and most of those have diesel). These issues with 3/4ton pickups would just happen to be more frequently a diesel issue. ?
We see more diesel 3/4 tons than the gassers for sure. That would make the number look like the issues are diesel related. We see the same long term chassis issues regardless of what engine sits under the hood.
Also, I wonder if there are fewer diesel techs out there, therefore fewer at each dealer (or none) and therefore a diesel issue is a much bigger problem, and more costly, than a comparable gas engine issue. ??
At our shop we have 3 out of my 4 techs (little shop, like I said) fully certified on Dmax and carry the new ASE light duty diesel certification. They way GM looks at things now if you don't have a tech fully certified you don't get any option for extra time if repairs are out of the box. Most shops should have multiple light duty diesel techs.
Could it also be attributed to how easy it is to make monster power numbers with simple tuners? I don't chip mine, but it is so easy to get those already high numbers sky high with the push of a button. That cannot be good for longevity and could be the death of so many diesels before their time.
Any modification comes with a compromise. Increase power and durability suffers. If one want's silly power numbers more mods are needed to beef up the head bolts, head gaskets and the rest of the bottom end to give that best ability to survive. Chips now can bring more power than they ever could and even can exceed the limits of the stock bottom ends and head bolts. It's almost too easy to get silly power numbers now.
In terms of high mileage diesel engines, I know these aren't the same, but why can't a diesel pickup diesel get the same kind of miles as a long haul truck? Do pickup owners tend to slack more on regular maintenance? Do those truckers just fork over huge cash to keep their rigs running? I know they are hauling huge loads all the time, but seems like if they can get super high miles from their engines, so can I.
A class 8 diesel is a different animal than the light duty diesel cousins. Those are built to run 500,000 miles plus. Everything is larger from the crank to the block. Cylinders are replaceable and engines can be rebuilt in the chassis. That's not so say the light duty versions can run a long way. Most of that depends on regular maintenance and keeping an eye on things. We have a local customer that has an earlier LB7 d-max dually that had 345,000 miles on it when it came into us for injectors. It was the 3rd set of injectors and outside of oil changes and flushing the coolant at the 100k mile marks it didn't need anything else. This guy delivers 5th wheel trailers for a living and racks the miles up.
As far as longevity, if the chassis are the same and just the engine is the issue, what if all the emissions stuff has been removed, or wasn't there to begin with (like my list I posted above)? Would that push the advantage back to the diesel engine? What if the regular maintenance schedule was altered to suit a diesel powertrain would that push the diesel back in front? What could I do to make the diesel more reliable than it's comparable gas counterpart?
If we are talking about chassis issues, again the engine really don't matter. As far as durability of a gas engine vs a de-emission diesel they are pretty close. At least with my experience with the GM stuff. Maintenance is the key. GM LS-small blocks are amazing pushrod gas engines. Just wait until the direct injected versions come out. If it's anything like the DI 3.6L v6 or ecotec 4's the power is amazing. That bump in power should translate well to the V8 lineup.
Damn Larry, you are shooting my diesel dreams all to heck!
Larry is a dream killer. LOL.
Truthfully, this is what I think would suit me best (minus all the govts annoying meddling), but again, can't get it.
(changing pace)
What are some thoughts on the IFS? I know they get a bad rap most of the time, but in my readings/research, I have heard numerous times that if you leave an IFS truck at stock height with stock tires, the IFS ends up costing less and being less hassle than a SFA. Major issues arise when people try and jack an IFS truck up. I figure, if you want a 6" lift on a truck, go SFA, but if you want a 'lower' cost front end and are willing to leave it alone, go with IFS. Also, why does a truck have to rattle your teeth out? Can't they make a robust truck rides nice? I really am not concerned with ride comfort (but maybe I am spoiled with the IFS), but seems like if you can make it right, you can also have it ride right. Doesn't need sport handling and all the leather and electric this and that, but improving ride comfort over long drives could reduce driver fatigue. That can't be a bad thing
IFS isn't as durable as a SFA off road in the long run, but the less you screw with them the longer they live as far as mods go. Ride quality has more to do with spring rate/choice than the type of axle under it. Crank torsion bars up on an IFS and it will rattle your bones when it was smooth before. On the flip side SFA's can ride quite nice with the right leaf spring or coil spring choice. Larry's truck is a great example. His suspension is dialed. Rides smooth on pavement and takes no prisoners off road. It didn't always ride like that. Many moons ago when we were out of college and working in Detroit we'd take big blue out to lunch and I would have thought a buckboard wagon might ride better on Detroit's nasty broken roads.
