Cummins Diesel Differences

[sret43]

I've toyed with the idea of buying a 2002 thru 2007 Dodge 2500 or 3500. In my searches there have been different types of CTDs advertised.
2002 5.9L with 5 spd
2002 5.9L HO with 6 spd
2007 5.9L
2007 6.7L
What exactly do these years have to offer and their differences?

Thanks, Steve

[712edf]

I have heard to avoid the 6.7 motor. Its thirstier & came about because of the ever increasing emissions regulations & lower sulfer diesel fuel.

As to the 5.9. it was offered in standard & high output versions in 2002 & a few years prior. Also auto trucks & manual trucks had different outputs themselves. I have heard that those who tow regularly should get the manual transmission. I can't specifically say what varies between each engine, and as with anything all can be modified to increase power.

Bucky

[BigMac]

The 2002's are 2nd generation trucks, as the heavy dutys didn't switch till 2003.

The 5.9 was offered in trucks from 1989-2005, in 12 and 24 valve configurations (89-98 12's and 98.5-2005 24's). It was offered in HO models starting in 2000, I believe,and came with the 6spd tranny. Standard output came with the 5spd. I beleive the main difference between the HO and Standard was the setup on the injection pump. As Bucky said they were offered in several different horsepower and tourque levels, depending on tranny selection. They even had different hp ratings for California.

The 6.7 was started with the 2006-current model years. It is a totally new motor to comply with new federal regulations. They have had some trouble with them, but I cannot recall what the specifics were. These motors, also have the the dreaded Diesel Particulate Filter on them. The DPF is said to increase fuel consumption, due to the buroff process it goes through. I have no first hand knowledge of this, as my truck is a '99 5.9 24v.

For the year ranges you posted, if it was me, I would definately look for a 5.9 truck with a 6spd.

Hope that helps,
Mac

[sret43]

Thanks to the both of you for the info. I really like the style of the 2002 but my wife doesn't seem to want to put up with the smaller back seat. Right now I have a 2002 Chevy 1500HD that has been a great truck with no problems at all. It has pulled my 1958 Dodge D400 around quite well but with it approaching 130,000 miles, it's time for a change.

[BigMac]

The bigger back seat is a lot nicer in the '03 and up. That is why I am selling mine and getting an '84 Crew Cab. My boys will be outgrowing that Quad Cab before long. It will suck being without my diesel, for a while, but the 84 will get a 12v as soon as I can afford it.

Mac

[mattsoldmopars]

The 6.7 was started with the 2006-current model years.

I am pretty sure that the 6.7 cummins was not in trucks until January 2007. (so all the model year 2007's made in the summer & fall of calendar year 2006 had the 5.9 still) I have a few buddys that have 2006 trucks and they all have the 5.9 cummins. I looked around on ebay yesterday and every 2006 on ebay for sale has the 5.9 most of the 2007 however have the 6.7, but there are a few 2007's with the 5.9 cummins still.

I not a big fan of either of them. I pretty much stopped following Dodges closely in 2003 when they came out with the common rail fuel injection system for the 5.9 cummins. The trucks with the common rail fuel injection system have injector problems, (they like to eat injector's) and they are a lot more $$ then the ones for the older style 5.9.

The 2003 & up trucks, dont have anymore room in the back of the cab then the 1998-2002 quad-cab trucks do. (if they do it is Barely Measurable!!) I have a few buddys that have them and I have been in the back seat of them, and there is not anymore "Noticeable" room back there then my 2000 quad-cab has, only thing is the doors open normal, where as the rear doors on a 1998-2002 quad-cab truck they open backwards. I am not talking about the meg-cabs either those are a whole different story.

[BigMac]

I am sorry, you are correct it was 2007 that the 6.7 came out.

As far as cab room, I think the 2003 and up Quads are much more cofortable than the 98-02 Quads. Maybe its just me?

Mac

[mattsoldmopars]

Your right,, we all have our preferences (likes or dis-likes) I know one thing for me that makes a big differance, is a Long trip inside of a truck, like a 15-20 hour trip and you will really find out what you like or dont like about the trucks interior.

I have spent a litte over 200,000 miles in the drivers seat of each of a 1999 and 2000 Dodge Ram 3500, (for a toal of over 400,00 miles combined) I like the seats and room that they offer, and dont have any real complaints about either one, but since I have not spent that much time in a newer truck, I dont have any real opinions to offer.

I have never taken a trip longer then 4 hours in a 2003 & newer Dodge, so I cant really comment much about it. My one buddy though that has a 2003 Dodge said he thinks his old 1999 had better seats for longer trips. He told me that after a while the seat in his 2003 flattens out and is very uncomfortable, he said the seat in his old 1999 Dodge never did this. I know he had a upholstery shop mess with the drivers seat to try and make it better, he said it helped some, but is still not the same as his 1999 was.

[BigMac]

Oh, yeah I love the front seats in my 99. I plan on putting those style seats in my crew cab when i get one.

My uncle has a 01 and I hate riding in the back for long trips. A friend of ours has a 03 and i definately prefer that back seat for long trips.

Mac

[mattsoldmopars]

I dont ever ride in the back seat of my truck, it is kind of hard to reach the wheel from there ;-)

The only time I spend back there is sleeping when I am on the road. So it is more of a bed for me then a seat.

[mattsoldmopars]

One other thing, (kind of off topic a little) I can tell you. Is that the interiors and seats are light years ahead in the 1998-2002 Dodge trucks then the 1989-1993 Dodge trucks.

I have a 1993 Dodge Ram W350 CTD truck, it has well over 400,000 miles on it and all but 40,000 miles of it were put on by me. That truck you take it on a cross-country trip and you feel like you have been around the world. I dont think it is the seats as much as it is the way the truck rides, like a buck-board. Dont get me worng I love that truck and would never think about selling it!! But now I only use it for close trips anymore say under 500 miles round trip from the house. That is about all I can stand in it.

It is not fair to compare the pre-1993 trucks with the 1998-2002 trucks but having rode in both for LONG trips. I know when I used to take my 1993 out more, riding in it 500 miles felt more like it was a 1000++ miles trip. Where as if I jump in my 2000 Dodge and take a trip I am not any were as tired or fatigued at the end of a trip, and a 1,000 mile trip does not feel like a 1,000 mile trip. Thats why I say they are light years ahead.

Again thats just my opinion,, others might not feel the same way.

[Doc Dave]

I've toyed with the idea of buying a 2002 thru 2007 Dodge 2500 or 3500. In my searches there have been different types of CTDs advertised.
2002 5.9L with 5 spd
2002 5.9L HO with 6 spd
2007 5.9L
2007 6.7L
What exactly do these years have to offer and their differences?

Thanks, Steve

Steve,
I have a 2001 high output 5.9 CTD with the 6 speed. I am very happy with it.
If having a little more comfortable back seat is important to you, then I would suggest a 2003-2006 truck with the 5.9 engine.
The 6 speed is beefier than the 5 speed, and also the gear ratios are closer (total span of the ratios are the same as the 5 speed).
My truck pulls like a locomotive. It has 505 lbs of torque bone stock. The first haul I had with it was a fully loaded two horse trailer. At times I had to remind myself I was towing something. Compared to my previous truck, a Ford with the 351 gas engine and auto, it was night and day as to towing power.
The only weaknesses of the 2nd gen trucks are that you need to deal with the stock lift pump issues (easy to do with an upgrade) and also the front end is a little weak and needs a few mods (also not too hard).
From what I have heard I would be reluctant to get the bigger motor that came out in '07.
One other thing. The best thing I ever did is after I bought my truck I subscribed to the TDR magazine (turbo diesel register) this also gave me access to all parts of their website. That decision has saved me a lot of money and headaches with upgrades, repairs, etc.

[billy-jay]

I have a 1st generation cummins in my 64 w200 crewcab and love the way it runs and handles but.....I towed my sons 41 1/2 ton to the VPW rally about 1400 miles round trip and it felt like more than that..... but we looked good!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Gsmith]

5,000 miles in a week

Last May we went from central Fl. to Colorado and back, leaving on a Monday morning and getting there Wednesday about noon. Left late Saturday morning and got back Monday afternoon. I did most of the driving and wasn't tired, so I can tell you the '02 front seats are pretty darn good! Of course my wife was in the back seat so she was cramped, but she's short so she survived.

[cj7ox]

I've got a 2006, quad cab, SRW 4x4 with the 5.9 and 6speed. Bone stock, it has 325hp, 610lb-ft. As I understand it, they fixed the lift pump and front end issues in 2005. My truck has over 120,000 miles on it, mostly highway. I tows a 16' flat bed trailer with 10,000lb load like it's nothing. I spent a lot of time traveling from my home outside Huntsville, AL to FT Knox, KY, or Hattiesburg, MS for training. I've also made several trips to El Paso, TX. It's quite comfortable to me. I get 22+ mpg in city driving (under 60mph), and 16+ on the freeway (around 80mph), when towing I get 13mph on highway. All in all, I think that it's the perfect year for a late model. Last model before all the Al Gore add ons.