Speaking of Ford Excursions...

[911boost]

I just put new brake pads in the back of mine today. Why anyone would pay to have that done is beyond me.

Bill

[Flying Toaster]

I bought my wife an '04 EX when her little freestyle took a beaten after a mild fender bender. I spent the few $$ more for the diesel option purely for longevity and fuel mileage. (The V10 gasser gets a whopping 7mpg around town). But with 4 kids in the back & the added ability to haul 8 full sized adults around very comfortably, my wife loves the feeling of safety she has in it now. It is a 3/4 ton frame that runs from the furthest point in the front, to the farthest point in the rear. Its a beast as my kids call it. Has the powerstroke & we are about to hit 100k miles. To answer another members question regarding the "smoke", its a programmer causing unburnt fuel to exit the tailpipe. I drive a duramax 3500 with a programmer, in the lower modes, it burns clean, if I put it int he "performance" modes, thats when the black smoke starts blowing. In general though, the EGR systems are significantly different (I think) in the powerstroke & duramax. Her powerstroke exhaust stinks something terrible, very traditional diesel smell. While my duramax burns very clean, doesnt smell like roses, but much cleaner "smelling" than the powerstroke. Both have their issues & so far, I am happy with both. As a sad note, my (4) daughters know of Bieber fever very well.....
-John

[Rufblackbird]

Originally Posted by kaisen

I have had lots of diesels, even an Excursion, but would take a gas Suburban over a diesel (or gas) Excusion any day

Disclaimer: I currently have a 8.1L gas Suburban 2500 4x4 tow rig

how come? I'm currently trying to decide between a '01 Silverado 3500 with a 8.1/allison (had a '01 Sierra 3500 with the 8.1/allison before, sold it with 360k miles) vs a '99 F350 with the 7.3 powerstroke, with the psd costing about $3k more.

[kaisen]

Originally Posted by kaisen

I have had lots of diesels, even an Excursion, but would take a gas Suburban over a diesel (or gas) Excusion any day

Originally Posted by Rufblackbird

how come? I'm currently trying to decide between a '01 Silverado 3500 with a 8.1/allison (had a '01 Sierra 3500 with the 8.1/allison before, sold it with 360k miles) vs a '99 F350 with the 7.3 powerstroke, with the psd costing about $3k more.

A Diesel Excursion 4x4 weighs ~7800 pounds empty and has a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 8600 pounds. Therefore, it can safely/legally carry ~800 pounds in the truck before exceeding its weight rating. Since Excursions have 7-9 seatbelts, let's hope they're all kids and didn't bring anything with them.

A Suburban 8.1L 4x4 weighs ~6300 pounds empty and has the same GVWR. It can safely/legally carry ~2500 pounds. Same 7-9 seatbelts, easily carry adults and their luggage.

Both have a 20,000 pound GCVWR. Since the Dsl Excursion weighs 1,500 pounds more than the Gas Sub, the Sub will legally/safely tow 1,500 pounds more trailer and stay within its rating.

The Excursion's turning radius? 50ft
Suburban? 35ft

There are a ton of other reasons

When it comes to trucks, however, the weight difference shrinks. The F-series still outweighs the GMT-800s by a few hundred pounds.

There's a lot more, I just don't have time

[911boost]

Just don't plan on towing anything over our passes here in Colorado with the gas motor.

BTDT and the diesel wins hands down.

Yes the Excursion has its bad points, but so does the Suburban.

Bill

[911boost]

Oh and 2004 4x4 Powerstroke Excursion has a GVWR of 9200 pounds, not 8600.

[fred cook]

Bought mine used in 2005. It is a 2003 Excursion Eddie Bauer edition with all the bells and whistles including the 6.0 Diesel engine. It is hands down the best towing vehicle that we have ever had, including a variety of GMC vehicles. We use it for towing a 27' camper and for trips. If one of the other cars is in the shop, then it gets put into service as a daily driver. We get about 15-16 mpg in town and 20-22 on the road. Towing the camper it gets about 13-14 mpg which is better than the 8-10 mpg we used to get with a gas engined tow vehicle. With the seating configuration it has, it will carry 7 people and all of their gear/luggage. With the third seat out, I can put a full sized air mattress in the back for sleeping purposes. It rides well and is comfortable on long trips and it's size makes it quite safe from other vehicles. We were rearended while sitting at a red light once and the GM SUV that hit us had to be towed from the scene. The damage to the Excursion amounted to a bent rear bumper and rear door hinge. Neither I nor my wife were injured. My only regrets about the Excursion is that Ford quit building them. I would buy a new one if possible.

[kaisen]

Originally Posted by BSiple

Just don't plan on towing anything over our passes here in Colorado with the gas motor.

BTDT and the diesel wins hands down.

Altitude favors forced induction. So if you regularly drive in mile-high altitudes, you'll like a turbocharged rig.

But let's put the supposed power differences into perspective:

A 2001 Excursion Diesel 4x4 makes 250 hp and 520 lb-ft torque, and weighs 7800 lbs
A 2001 Suburban 8.1L 4x4 makes 340 hp and 455 lb-ft torque, and weighs 6300 lbs

The Suburban has to move 18.5 lbs per horsepower (6300/340)
The Excursion has to move 31.2 lbs per horsepower (7800/250)
69% more weight for each horsepower (no matter how it is loaded, all the way up to max GCWR)
Advantage, Suburban.....and why the Sub is 3 seconds quicker 0-60mph

The Suburban has to move 13.8 lbs per lb-ft (6300/455)
The Excursion has to move 15.0 lbs per lb-ft (7800/520)
Advantage, Suburban....even though the Diesel makes more torque

At sea level, it's not much of a contest

Towing a 7000 pound car trailer at 6000 feet (Denver, CO) should certainly favor the Excursion, right? A naturally aspirated motor loses ~3% per 1000 feet where a turbo motor theoretically stays the same.

The Suburban has to move 49.0 lbs per horsepower (6300+7000)/(340*0.80)
The Excursion has to move 59.2 lbs per horsepower (7800+7000)/(250*1.00)
Advantage, Suburban....even loaded, even at altitude

The Suburban has to move 36.5 lbs per lb-ft (6300+7000)/(455*0.80)
The Excursion has to move 28.5 lbs per lb-ft (7800+7000)/(520*1.00)
Advantage, Excursion

However, both horspower and torque are important when towing on the freeway. Torque means you can move the load, horsepower dictates how quickly. The diesel doesn't win hands down. I doubt you've driven a 8.1L GM. Or any number of the newer gas motors.
Moral of the story? If you live in Denver, or frequently traverse 10,000 ft elevations towing your trailer over mountain passes, by all means buy a turbocharged vehicle (in this case, a turbodiesel). But for the rest of us who live and drive in 85th percentile US altitudes, the 8.1L Sub should out-perform a 7.3L Diesel Excursion with the same trailer behind it.

I realize it is "conventional wisdom" that a diesel is somehow better. And it should be, the diesel option adds several thousand dollars over the price of a gas models. In the specific case of the Suburban versus the Excursion, the "weight" of the matter is insurmountable. We all sing praises of lightweight sports cars but somehow think the laws of physics change when we're talking about trucks. The Excursion was the only "modern" SUV available with a diesel. So if you're sold on the idea of a diesel, you'll be sold on the idea of an Excursion.....because it's your only choice.

Diesels are very expensive right now. Illogically so. A 2001-2003 Diesel Excursion (the "good" one with the 7.3L) is $10,000 more than an otherwise comparable 2001-2003 Suburban 8.1L. Fred mentioned that his diesel gets about 30% better fuel economy than his gassers did. That's about the same anecdotal info you'll find all over the net (20-40%). At that rate it would take more than ten years to offset the initial purchase price. The same exact people who would jump all over a hybrid gas-electric (or, heaven forbid, pure EV) with that same logic somehow defend the diesel's outrageous purchase price. Hypocritical, I think.

Don't get me wrong, I love modern diesels. I've owned them all, and the new ones are incredible performers (400 hp? 800 lb-ft? Sign me up). But to pay $20K for a ten year old diesel Excursion with 120K miles makes sense only to those who think they "need" a diesel SUV, rationalize their only choice as the best choice.

Ford : Excursion POLICE PKG Ford : Excursion POLICE PKG | eBay

Originally Posted by BSiple

Oh and 2004 4x4 Powerstroke Excursion has a GVWR of 9200 pounds, not 8600.

Yes the later diesel-only Excursions had an increased 9,200 lb GVWR
Suburban 2500s make do with 8,600 lb GVWR
Even so, the Sub will haul, hold, and tow more.

[gprsh924]

Eric I love your logical breakdowns in these debates.

I'm waiting for the captivating response: "Yea but still"

[Superman]

Originally Posted by aigel

Unfortunately I could not find a clean one for what the pay out was. They hold their value exremely well. Nobody makes a good towing SUV.
G

I know how deeply some Pelicanheads hate gubmit regulation and place all their faith in commerce and 'market forces'......but I sure have a hard time understanding how insurance companies can routinely get away with insurance payouts that WILL NOT replace the totaled vehicle with something similar. Yes, I do understand how they can do this. The cost of pursuing the claim for that extra few thousand dollars.....is higher than the money you would recover. Wonderful. We pay hundreds each month, for years at a time, and when we need something from the insurance company, they bend us over the kitchen counter. And that's just the way it is.

[szyzygy]

Originally Posted by Oh Haha

When the light changed I let them go first and then was treated to a snoot full of diesel exhaust. I don't have A/C so I run with the windows open when not at freeway speeds.

why did you let them go first?

I make it a point to ALWAYS get pole position at a light, and to be infront of everyone else on the road, whenever possible.

[911boost]

Eric, I have the "bad" 6.0L 2004 which has 320 HP and 560 ft lbs, so that changes the math you did.

And yes, I have driven the 8.1 GM and you could literally watch the gas gauge go down when my buddy pulled his camper or work trailer with it. It did pull hard though, but with the small gas tank and poor mpg it was a pain.

The weak spot in my opinion for the 2001 Ford and Chevy is going to be the transmssion. The newer Allison and Torqueshift (or whatever the exact name is for the HD Ford one) are both good transmissions.

But basically you are correct, since I live in Fort Collins, and do almost all of my towing at 7,500 or higher, I wanted a factory turbocharged towing vehicle. My wife like the versitility of our previous Tahoe, that left me with the Excursion.

After doing a lot of research, and having worked on the 7.3L and knowing its weaknesses as well, I decided to find a well maintained 6.0L so I could get the newest model year. I looked at 2004 and 2005's, with the 2005's commanding a pretty steep premium at the time. I had someone at Ford run me the OASIS report on the one I found so I knew what kind of problems and reapirs has been done to it. I have not modified it any way except wider tires and adding a 1 ton rear sway bar and use the fuel additive.

After 3 years with it, and 70,000 (100K total) miles I am VERY happy with it.

Bill

[fred cook]

Originally Posted by kaisen

Altitude favors forced induction. So if you regularly drive in mile-high altitudes, you'll like a turbocharged rig.

But let's put the supposed power differences into perspective:

A 2001 Excursion Diesel 4x4 makes 250 hp and 520 lb-ft torque, and weighs 7800 lbs
A 2001 Suburban 8.1L 4x4 makes 340 hp and 455 lb-ft torque, and weighs 6300 lbs

The Suburban has to move 18.5 lbs per horsepower (6300/340)
The Excursion has to move 31.2 lbs per horsepower (7800/250)
69% more weight for each horsepower (no matter how it is loaded, all the way up to max GCWR)
Advantage, Suburban.....and why the Sub is 3 seconds quicker 0-60mph

The Suburban has to move 13.8 lbs per lb-ft (6300/455)
The Excursion has to move 15.0 lbs per lb-ft (7800/520)
Advantage, Suburban....even though the Diesel makes more torque

At sea level, it's not much of a contest

Towing a 7000 pound car trailer at 6000 feet (Denver, CO) should certainly favor the Excursion, right? A naturally aspirated motor loses ~3% per 1000 feet where a turbo motor theoretically stays the same.

The Suburban has to move 49.0 lbs per horsepower (6300+7000)/(340*0.80)
The Excursion has to move 59.2 lbs per horsepower (7800+7000)/(250*1.00)
Advantage, Suburban....even loaded, even at altitude

The Suburban has to move 36.5 lbs per lb-ft (6300+7000)/(455*0.80)
The Excursion has to move 28.5 lbs per lb-ft (7800+7000)/(520*1.00)
Advantage, Excursion

However, both horspower and torque are important when towing on the freeway. Torque means you can move the load, horsepower dictates how quickly. The diesel doesn't win hands down. I doubt you've driven a 8.1L GM. Or any number of the newer gas motors.
Moral of the story? If you live in Denver, or frequently traverse 10,000 ft elevations towing your trailer over mountain passes, by all means buy a turbocharged vehicle (in this case, a turbodiesel). But for the rest of us who live and drive in 85th percentile US altitudes, the 8.1L Sub should out-perform a 7.3L Diesel Excursion with the same trailer behind it.

I realize it is "conventional wisdom" that a diesel is somehow better. And it should be, the diesel option adds several thousand dollars over the price of a gas models. In the specific case of the Suburban versus the Excursion, the "weight" of the matter is insurmountable. We all sing praises of lightweight sports cars but somehow think the laws of physics change when we're talking about trucks. The Excursion was the only "modern" SUV available with a diesel. So if you're sold on the idea of a diesel, you'll be sold on the idea of an Excursion.....because it's your only choice.

Diesels are very expensive right now. Illogically so. A 2001-2003 Diesel Excursion (the "good" one with the 7.3L) is $10,000 more than an otherwise comparable 2001-2003 Suburban 8.1L. Fred mentioned that his diesel gets about 30% better fuel economy than his gassers did. That's about the same anecdotal info you'll find all over the net (20-40%). At that rate it would take more than ten years to offset the initial purchase price. The same exact people who would jump all over a hybrid gas-electric (or, heaven forbid, pure EV) with that same logic somehow defend the diesel's outrageous purchase price. Hypocritical, I think.

Don't get me wrong, I love modern diesels. I've owned them all, and the new ones are incredible performers (400 hp? 800 lb-ft? Sign me up). But to pay $20K for a ten year old diesel Excursion with 120K miles makes sense only to those who think they "need" a diesel SUV, rationalize their only choice as the best choice.

Ford : Excursion POLICE PKG Ford : Excursion POLICE PKG | eBay



Yes the later diesel-only Excursions had an increased 9,200 lb GVWR
Suburban 2500s make do with 8,600 lb GVWR
Even so, the Sub will haul, hold, and tow more.

My 2003 6.0 Diesel has the following specs:
325 hp @3300 rpm
560 ftlbs torque @ 2000 rpm
Curb wt = 7197 lbs
Max payload = 1703
Towing limit = 11,000 lbs

So, now the wt to hp = 7197 / 325 = 22.2 lbs/hp
which is very close to the Subs numbers. The torque
works out to 7197/560 = 12.85 lbs/ftlb, better than the
Sub. The towing numbers work out about the same. So,
it looks like the 6.0 would be a better towing choice.
Also, it is nice to be able to tow 600 plus miles without
having to stop for fuel/gas! All things considered, I'll take
the Diesel Excursion, thank you.

[azasadny]

Wayne, you have my sympathy... having to listen to Beiber is just horrible...

[speeder]

Originally Posted by kaisen

Diesels are very expensive right now. Illogically so. A 2001-2003 Diesel Excursion (the "good" one with the 7.3L) is $10,000 more than an otherwise comparable 2001-2003 Suburban 8.1L. Fred mentioned that his diesel gets about 30% better fuel economy than his gassers did. That's about the same anecdotal info you'll find all over the net (20-40%). At that rate it would take more than ten years to offset the initial purchase price. The same exact people who would jump all over a hybrid gas-electric (or, heaven forbid, pure EV) with that same logic somehow defend the diesel's outrageous purchase price. Hypocritical, I think.

It would take 10 years for the diesel to pay for itself if you are going to own each one for 10 years and then drive them into a lake. In the real world, where people keep trucks for a few years and then sell them, you would get most or all of the increased cost back on resale and the only difference would be the money you had tied-up in the equipment while you owned it. I've more than gotten my money back on both of the diesel PU trucks I've owned, they were esentially free with all fuel burned free as well. Try that on an 8 liter gas truck that you drive x-country a couple times and then sell and let me know how it goes.

Between the depreciation and difficulty in selling a HD gas truck, (you really have to give them away), and the massive monthly fuel bill if you tow and/or put miles on it, it's an expensive and joyless ownership experience. Driving a nice diesel is a joy in comparison and makes a lot more financial sense if you can afford the initial outlay and don't over-pay like an idiot for it. Torque #s are the only #s that matter on a truck. Diesel engines have deceptively low HP ratings, I'm surprised that you mention them as a comparison.

A very powerful semi engine with 1000 lbs. of torque might only have 350 HP. A Formula one engine has 750 HP. Which one do you think will pull a load of steel beams in a fully-loaded semi over a mountain better? The F-1 engine would probably not be able to move the truck empty on level ground. An extreme example to make my point, I know, but you know all too well that torque #s are the only ones that matter.

There is not a tractor-trailer, train, ship or heavy construction machine in the world with a gasoline engine, AFAIK. Diesels are the far superior type of engine for moving heavy weight. More torque and a massive difference in efficiency.

[kaisen]

Originally Posted by fred cook

My 2003 6.0 Diesel has the following specs:
325 hp @3300 rpm
560 ftlbs torque @ 2000 rpm
Curb wt = 7197 lbs
Max payload = 1703
Towing limit = 11,000 lbs

You're right, the base curb weight for a no-options Excursion is 7197 pounds

Same goes for the Sub. Base Curb weight for a 1500 5.3L 2wd is 4914 lbs. Base for a 2500 4WD is 5760 lbs. Notice I used 6300 lbs, which is typical for a 8.1L 4x4, normally equipped. Real world as-tested weights vary depending on year, trim/options, and how much fuel is in the tank.

So base to base is 7197 vs 5760, or 1437 pounds difference

So use whatever numbers you want, an apples to apples comparison puts a Diesel Excursion at roughly 1500 pounds more than a 8.1L Sub.

Excursions hold 44 gallons of fuel and Suburban 2500s hold 39, not a huge difference (10%). I'd personally give up 5 gallons to have the full-size spare underneath (Sub) rather than taking up a huge chunk of rear cargo space (Ex).

There's no doubt that the 6.0L is a "better" motor on paper. They're smoother, quieter, more powerful, with a more useable powerband than the old 7.3L. But the OP was talking about the "more desirable" 7.3L, so that's what I compared.

[911boost]

I agree that the OP was talking about the 7.3L, but I think it has been long enough for the 6.0's with problems to surface. I wouldn't hesitate buying a 6.0 or 6.4 righ now.

As with every 911 engine, there are issues, but if you are smart and do your homework, it can be done.

On an unrelated note, all of my friends with HD GM trucks constantly ***** about the tiny gas tanks. I wonder why GM does that.

[speeder]

Originally Posted by BSiple

I agree that the OP was talking about the 7.3L, but I think it has been long enough for the 6.0's with problems to surface. I wouldn't hesitate buying a 6.0 or 6.4 righ now.

As with every 911 engine, there are issues, but if you are smart and do your homework, it can be done.

On an unrelated note, all of my friends with HD GM trucks constantly ***** about the tiny gas tanks. I wonder why GM does that.

So that you can watch the gas gauge move. It's fun.

[kaisen]

Originally Posted by speeder

It would take 10 years for the diesel to pay for itself if you are going to own each one for 10 years and then drive them into a lake. In the real world, where people keep trucks for a few years and then sell them, you would get most or all of the increased cost back on resale and the only difference would be the money you had tied-up in the equipment while you owned it. I've more than gotten my money back on both of the diesel PU trucks I've owned, they were esentially free with all fuel burned free as well. Try that on an 8 liter gas truck that you drive x-country a couple times and then sell and let me know how it goes.

You know I love diesels (and I know you LOVE diesels), but you're painting with a mighty broad brush in your statements.

Originally Posted by speeder

Between the depreciation and difficulty in selling a HD gas truck, (you really have to give them away), and the massive monthly fuel bill if you tow and/or put miles on it, it's an expensive and joyless ownership experience.

Massive? Another commonly repeated fallacy. Let's assume that you "tow AND put miles on it" -- towing 1000 miles per month. Using Fred's numbers the gas pig at 10 mpg and the diesel at 14 mpg, you'd burn 100 gallons of gasoline (@$3.57 natl avg) and 72 gallons of diesel (@$3.78 natl avg). That's about an $85 difference. Hardly "massive". Yet you paid $10,000 more more to save it.

Again, when using that arguement when referring to hybrids most Pelicans would rip that scenario to shreds.....

Originally Posted by speeder

Torque #s are the only #s that matter on a truck. Diesel engines have deceptively low HP ratings, I'm surprised that you mention them as a comparison.

A very powerful semi engine with 1000 lbs. of torque might only have 350 HP. A Formula one engine has 750 HP. Which one do you think will pull a load of steel beams in a fully-loaded semi over a mountain better? The F-1 engine would probably not be able to move the truck empty on level ground. An extreme example to make my point, I know, but you know all too well that torque #s are the only ones that matter.

Really?

Not

Both horsepower AND torque are important for towing on the freeway. Why do you think a "very powerful semi" has 18 speeds? Think about it. Horsepower is a function of torque, they're related. That semi that makes 1000 lb-ft but only 350 hp only does so because it can't rev high enough to make more horsepower. So it needs lots of gears to keep it in its (relatively) narrow powerband. That's the way diesels work.

So it is with a 7.3L Powerstroke. They make peak torque at 1600 rpm and peak horsepower at 2700 rpm. Redline is 3200 rpm. From 1400 to 2200 rpm torque is strong, staying almost 500 lb-ft. After 2200 rpm they fall off very fast, Under 1200 rpm (no boost) and over 3000 rpm they make less than 400 lb-ft and less than 200hp. So their "effective" powerband is from 1250 rpm to 2550 rpm. Keep them there and they're happy.

Not true of a 8.1L gas motor. They make peak torque at 3200 rpm and peak horsepower at 4200 rpm. Full-throttle shift point is 5200 rpm and redline is 6000 rpm. From 1500 rpm to 3800 rpm torque is strong, staying above 400 lb-ft. After 5000 rpm, they've fallen below 300 lb-ft and a little over 300 horspower, which is why they shift at 4800-5200 rpm WOT. Their "effective" powerband is from 1250 rpm to 4450 rpm.

At 3000 rpm the 8.1L gasser is making 280 hp and 450 lb-ft where the 7.3L Powerstroke is making, well, nothing. It can't spin that fast. At 4000 rpm, the 8.1L is still making 330 hp and 420 lb-ft. By 5000 rpm, both hp/tq are around 300.

By 1500 rpm, the 8.1L gasser starts making more horsepower than the 7.3L PSD. By 2300 rpm it starts making both more torque and horsepower, and continues all the way until 5000 rpm.

What's my point?

It's the area under the curve that counts in a street motor. The breadth of a powerband from low rpm to high rpm, not just peak numbers. Its flexibility. It's ability to pull at both low and high rpms......because neither the Excursion nor Suburban have 18 speeds like a semi.

Getting a load moving and keeping a load moving at speed are two distinctly different things. One takes torque, the other takes horsepower. You can gear for it, but when you only have four gears to choose from an a powerband that's only 1300 rpm wide....

Here's an applied scenario:

Let's say you have a 2003 Suburban and a 2003 Excursion 7.3 PSD
Both trucks have 265/75-16 tires (31.5")
Both trucks have 3.73 differentials

The GM's 4L85E vs Ford's 4R100 transmissions:
1st .. 2.48 .. 2.71
2nd .. 1.48 .. 1.54
3rd .. 1.00 .. 1.00
4th .. .075 .. 0.71

At 70 mph in fourth gear, the Sub will be turning 2100 rpm and the Ex at 2000
At 70 mph in third gear, both will be 2800 rpm (way over PSD power peaks, near redline)
At 70 mph in second gear, the Sub will be 4100 rpm (near peak horsepower) and the Ex at 4300 rpm (WAY over redline -- not possible)

So if you encounter a steep grade while towing at 70 mph, one that requires the extra leverage of 2nd gear the Powerstroke would have to slow down to 50 mph to stay under redline. In 2nd gear the Sub could pull 90 mph and still stay under the 5200 rpm WOT shiftpoint. Really extreme load/hill? The Sub can do over 50 mph in first, where the PSD can't break 30mph.

Whether the Sub has to downshift because it makes less power is largely irrelevant. The point is that it CAN still do the work and maintain 70 mph where the Excursion may run out of steam. It's happiest under 2600 rpm (where it still makes good power)

Remember, at 70 mph (2800 rpm) in third gear the Sub is still making 260 hp and 440 lb-ft. The Excursion 7.3 PSD is only making 185 hp and 320 lb-ft......And it's trying to move an extra 1500 pounds.

Which makes a better tow rig? They can both do the work. The Sub can just do the work faster.

One answer is to add more gears. The "bad" 6.0L got one more gear in the 5R110 (TorqueShift). But wait, the top two gears are the same (1.00 and 0.71), it's the first two/three that vary.

Ah, but guess what? The 6.0L PSD also gained "breadth" to its powerband and a higher redline (4200 rpm fuel cutout).

6.0L PSD = more HORSEPOWER (not important, right Denis?), a little more torque, and 1000 rpm higher redline.... so it can make use of under-driven gears at higher speeds. It can do more work, faster. It's a much better competitor to the 8.1L gasser, as BSiple and Fred Cook pointed out.

Originally Posted by speeder

Driving a nice diesel is a joy in comparison and makes a lot more financial sense if you can afford the initial outlay and don't over-pay like an idiot for it.

^^THIS^^

My point is that some diesels are on the bubble right now.
A 2003 Excursion 7.3 Diesel for $20-30K??? You're overpaying. Period.
Resale-logic on a $1MM home in Las Vegas appeared to be a safe bet at one point too.
The ONLY reason Diesel Excursions are holding that ridiculous value is that they are the ONLY choice if you've talked yourself into a diesel. And people talk themselves into a diesel because they haven't really looked at the data. They simply regurgitate the anecdotal information from their buddies. They don't even look to see that a comparable gas-powered tow rig would be HALF the price.

You can keep your $20-30K Excursion 7.3s

If I were forced (or truly needed, somehow) a factory diesel SUV it would be a 2005 Excursion 6.0L PSD with the coil spring front axle.

[kaisen]

Originally Posted by BSiple

On an unrelated note, all of my friends with HD GM trucks constantly ***** about the tiny gas tanks. I wonder why GM does that.

Subs have a 39 gallon tank. You have a 44 gallon tank. 10% difference. Not a big deal?