Cummins mpg vs 225 Slant 6 mpg

-
Hyperballsmcgee

Hyperballsmcgee

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 5, 2013
Messages
227
Reaction score
0
Location
Murfreesboro, TN
I need some opinions here. I have found two trucks I like equally, and are the same price.

first one is a 1974 d-100 single cab stepside with a 225 slant 6 and 3 on the tree manual. cons are torn seat, cracked dash, and needs tires.

second is a 1982 d-150(ram) single cab stepside with a 5.9 first gen cummins. cons are ugly hot rod flame paint job, not sure if it can pass emissions.

my main deciding factor is gas mileage as this will be a daily driver.

but... the '82 has a nice of weld bullethole wheels, 3.5" rims 4.5" tire skinnies up front, and 8" rim 10" tire fattys in back that would look great on my scamp. I'll just put my Rallyes on the truck.

opinions?
 
I would think fuel costs would be pretty equal but the diesel will run on bio fuel if you are so inclined. I would go diesel.
 
What transmission does the 82 have? Also don't just consider mileage but the fact diesel is always $.50-$.80/gallon more then gas. So if the diesel gets 20 it costs more then the gas getting 17. Personally I think both trucks are terrible ideas for daily drivers.
 
if you need a daily driver thats a truck buy the cummins, the slant truck is underpowered and even more underpowered with a load on. lucky to get 15 MPG

the factory cummins trucks are 3/4 ton, if the 82 isn't look elsewhere, nothing in a 1/2 ton is strong enough to support the cummins engine

plus side is the first gen cummins engines 1989-1993 got 20+ MPG and rarely need any work, they can run 500,000 miles without much work just the simple filters and oil changes

the diesel will get the same MPG loaded or empty, and climb hills the same
 
The 3/4 ton dodge gas trucks were lighter than the Cummins as well. A Cummins would turn either frame into a pretzel. In 1989 Cummins mandated the structural standards for Dodge. if Dodge didn't do it, they didn't get the engine. As mentioned earlier, the Cummins is 1300+ pounds on the nose, versus 500 or so for the slant six or the small block. Buy a real older model, and get the real deal.
 
I am a slant guy but being that we own two Cummins powered trucks, I'd have to go that route hands down. Dad's '01 24v gets an easy 20+mpg anytime. The only slant vehicle I have seen get better fuel economy than a Cummins is dad's Feather Duster. Power and mpg go to the diesel without question.
 
If it's a factory Cummins and not a conversion go the cummins. The 1st. generation can get closer to 25 MPG. They however will not go as fast MPH as the newer Diesels because the gearing back then was different and you did not have the overdrive ratios they have now.

Does take more$$$ to change the oil & filters versus the slanty.
 
How do you plan to USE the truck? Just putting around town, occasional trip to the dump? Go with the slant. Lots of hauling, freeway driving, towing? Cummins all the way! I would also question the Cummins swap into a half ton.
 
nothingbutdarts said:
If it's a factory Cummins and not a conversion go the cummins. The 1st. generation can get closer to 25 MPG. They however will not go as fast MPH as the newer Diesels because the gearing back then was different and you did not have the overdrive ratios they have now.

Does take more$$$ to change the oil & filters versus the slanty.
Click to expand...

1982 would not be factory cummins, first cummins was 1989 I believe

the cummins engine would do twice the work that a slant could in that time frame of changing oil and filters too, also longer intervals in between changes
 
Cummins. If you don't like it, sell the motor/trans for G and get motor of choice. Buddy has a early Duramax short bed ( one of 2 built!) and he clocked 38mpg on a desert run.
 
I read the post and wasn't going to comment

Then went back and re read the original question

I have a 95 with a Cummins and love the truck

The question most ask is how you are going to drive it.

That would be my question too.

I have had several diesels, 1981 Olds 98, 1983 Elcamino and my cummins

Many people I know had diesels and nothing but trouble out of them. My Olds had about 200,000 miles on it when I sold it. It was tired, but still ran and got decent mileage. It got drove a LOT. My Elcamino had 240,000 miles on it and the engine had NEVER been out of it. The original owner put 140,000 miles on it in 5 years. He started it in the morning and drove it all over the state to check on job sites.

My Dodge has 148,000 miles and for the most part when it gets started it runs long enough to get warm not just short trips to the store and never getting it hot.

The biggest problem most people have with diesels is the lack of use. Start and stop short distance, never getting the engine warm.

So my question for you as a daily driver, how will you drive it? Short trips to the store, or are you going to drive 15-20 miles one way at speed before shutting the truck off?

Since it is a cummins in a 1/2 ton, who did the mod and how did they do it?

In my opinion if the slant 6 truck is a good truck and not a bastard put together and you are going to have to depend on it, I would probably choose it.

A hot rodded old truck is just that. You will be working on it more than driving it. You are wanting a DAILY DRIVER, that means DEPENDABLITY! right?

So pick the one you think will be the most dependable and then try and figure how much you want to work on it and the expensive it will be to drive. COST is more than gas mileage, the maintenance, repairs and fuel must be looked at.

So it really is your choice, mine would be the one that will get the job done that is needed.

My next truck will be a gas truck, I just cannot justify the diesel. Love it, but just don't need it.
 
Any chance the 82 is really an 89 with an 82 cab and bed? Otherwise I'd pass due to the frame issues mentioned.
 
My buddy has a 5.9 common rail Cummins, with an air intake and free flowing exhaust he gets over 20 mpg highway. Thats in a Heavy Duty with 33.5 inch all terrains and an automatic transmission. 4.10 gears.
 
I somewhat question the claims of some peoples mileage claims. I bought a diesel hoping for those 20 mpg claims but never got close. It did have all the power I could ever use, pull a hill with a camper and a boat and accelerate while doing it but power isn't free. I never got better then 17 unloaded on the highway, 12 loaded. The big block gas motor it replaced would only get 14 unloaded and 10 loaded but with diesel at $.80 more per gallon I wasn't saving anything so I sold it. It was a $14,000 truck and didn't get used enough to be the most expensive vehicle I owned.

Personally if you want good reliability and need a light duty truck for a daily driver look for a late 80's 4.0 Jeep. Those 4.0s will go forever and can get 20mpg down the highway which is like getting over 25 with a diesel.
 
I have a cummins with 200k on it in a dually backed by a 6 speed. I average well over 20mpg. It makes great power and has potential to make much more. The service interval for a rebuild is 500k.

Not sure about where you are located but in NYS diesels are safety only. No emissions.
 
it will be replacing a 1999 ford ranger, 4 cylinder, 5 speed. slow, and gets terrible gas mileage for a 4 popper. right around 20.

new daily MUST be a truck and MUST have a manual transmission.

it will sometimes be used to trailer my scamp as it has 4.10 gears and the two closest drag strips are several cities away. this factor could be exempt though.

all I know about the swap is it was done by a shop called "Murley's Mopar Performance" in Kentucky and it is one of their "shop trucks".

also, my commuting involves lots of freeway driving, which is a concern of mine for the '74 being that is only a 3 speed.
 
and as far as the Ranger, by slow I do not only mean "low top speed" or "bad acceleration" I mean there is a complete lack of power. my 74 maverick with a 200 ci inline 6, with a one barrel carb had more power.
 
I know all about the 2.3l-2.5l rangers have no power so I did a 2.3 turbo out of an SVO mustang in my '91. Have more then enough mods for over 300hp and still get my 27mpg the non turbo 2.3 got :cheers:
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1997.jpg
    96.4 KB · Views: 446
92 dodges had the heavier frame for the cummins. before that they were the same. I installed a 05 common rail cummins and all components from a 91-93 deseil dodges I had here into a 87 1/2 ton short bed dodge. It was turned up and would turn all 4 36" tires and never had a frame issue.

It was the 89 though 91 club cabs that had a problem with the frame. I would go diesel but that is me. I love the 1st gen and 5.9 the common rails. If its auto make sure it has the early 1st gen transmission the rest are junk.

all pics below are of the same 87 dodge owned since new.
 
you can rebuild that slant 5 times before you can rebuild that cummins. cost of operation would go way down just imagine injectors pumps etc.
if its not a factory diesel, tehn id question the workmanship if its as cheap as the slant truck
 
Hyperballsmcgee said:
it will be replacing a 1999 ford ranger, 4 cylinder, 5 speed. slow, and gets terrible gas mileage for a 4 popper. right around 20.

new daily MUST be a truck and MUST have a manual transmission.
Click to expand...

This is why I run diesel. Tons of power, good milage, minimal maintenance and long longgevity.

My cummins is a stick. Definitly helps with milage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top