PDA

View Full Version : Ford or Chevy Diesel Mason Dump


Markf
07-24-2005, 11:18 PM
Gentlemen,
The last thing I wish to hear about or start an argument is a Chevy versus Ford peeing contest. Having said that, the situation is the following: my son and I have agreed to purchase a used 4x4 F350 or 3500 mason dump diesel long wheel base. At present, we are not considering a F450 or 4500 because the truck will be parked on our property. I need to look into the town's regulation on that. We figure that we can go up to $18,000. I have located a 98 3500 with 70k on it with a 6.5l engine. My son has 2000 F350 with a 7.3l PS so I am some what familiar with the Ford product, but only in a regular cab. We will mainly use the dump for mulch jobs but we will be expanding into hardscapes in the future after proper training, etc. It may also be used for plowing. Your honest opinions if you have owned such vehicles is greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance. :help:
Mark

Gravel Rat
07-25-2005, 01:27 AM
I would go with the Ford if you are going with a 4x4 the Chev 4x4 1 tons are really not that good plus if you are going with a 6.5 thats even worse :laugh:

One thing to consider once you put a dump body on 1 ton you don't have much "legal" payload left I don't know what size of dump body you want it should be a minimum 9' a 10 or 11 foot on a truck with a 84 ca is better. Your looking at around 2000lbs just for the body so you subract that from 12,000lbs your gvw is down to 10,000lbs gvw. Most 1 ton diesels with a dump body will weigh around 8000lbs it will give you about 3500lbs.

A F-450 sized truck with a 15,000lb gvw it doesn't weigh much more empty you would be looking at a 7000lb payload you would beable to easily carry 2.5 yards of gravel. With a 1 ton with a 3500lb payload your looking at only able to carry 1 yard to 1.5 yards of gravel.

I'am going through the same decision I currently have a 89 F-450 and I need to upgrade to a newer truck I would like to have a 4x4 but the 88-97 F-450s were never sold as 4x4s. That means I would have to go to a 99 or newer 450 which is payup so I will have to go back to a F-350 to have a 4x4 the problem is not enough legal payload and braking power.

The second problem is the gov't here has changed the rules now they have made 15,000lb gvw trucks commercial so it makes it more of a PITA to run a F-450 as a work/daily driver.

I have been looking at 92-97 F-350s I want to put a 11' dumping flatdeck on it because a dumping flat is lighter than a mason box its not as strong for dumping rocky material on but it works. The one thing I have to be carefull about is not get stopped by the DOT a overload fine won't be cheap. I will also have to be carefull about brakes the braking power of F-350s isn't that good. I know a F-350 won't carry a 8000lb load like my F-450 will I know the F-350 will struggle with 6000lbs of gravel where that just smoothed out the ride on a F-450.

I'am a little undecided yet I can find 92-97 F-450s easier and cheaper and in better shape over the same year F-350 4x4 cab and chassis with the same wheelbase. I'am looking for diesel I will never go back to gas been there done that never again the 460 Ford gas only gets 6-8 mpg.

StealthDT
07-26-2005, 01:21 AM
I had brand new 94 Chevy 3500 dump Turbo Diesel 5 speed, and a 94 Ford F450 non turbo diesel AT at the same time. Things you can expect to go wrong:

Chevy:
reverse gear ratio too high to jump curb loaded=burnt clutch
exhaust manifold cracked=$1500
excess frame flexing=cracked frame behind the cab
ground clearance sucks
brakes are junk
try to talk on the cell, steer & shift without spilling your coffee
turbo boost leads to abuse of gas pedal

Ford:
glow plug power wire lug behind air cleaner burns up of corrodes.
big a$$ disk brakes on rear axel saved a life
towing equipment with automatic was smooth
never spent a day in the shop until the tires wore out.
got me to the job & home daily

Markf
07-26-2005, 04:54 PM
Gentlemen,
Thank you for the input. It seems like I may be able to pick up a 93 F350 7.3 diesel dump. 5 spd, 8 or 9 foot bed, plow for 5-6K. I am not sure if turbo or not. What might I expect in fuel economy?
Mark

Smalltimer1
07-27-2005, 01:36 AM
Gentlemen,
Thank you for the input. It seems like I may be able to pick up a 93 F350 7.3 diesel dump. 5 spd, 8 or 9 foot bed, plow for 5-6K. I am not sure if turbo or not. What might I expect in fuel economy?
Mark


How many miles? If it is a late '93 then it very well may have a turbo, that would make it an IDI Turbo, not a Power Stroke.

Make sure you check the SCA level in the coolant. If there is none or very little move on to the next one. This is very important, as cavitation has caused many good 7.3's to die early.

As for fuel economy you could probably expect around 10-12, possibly 14 empty, and about 8-10 towing.

Gravel Rat
07-27-2005, 01:47 AM
You should see anywhere from 10-13mpg with a F-350 4x4 dump with IDI power and 5spd you may beable to squeek 15mpg out of it. The problem with the swb trucks with the 8' boxes is the front wheels lift off the ground giving you light steering. The F-350s with the 161wb with a 10' box you can get enough weight forward so the truck handles good it also rides better.

I was looking at the truckpaper.com all the F-350s 4x4s I found were swb trucks with 8' boxes they are just too short. A 9' box on a 60ca truck is even worse you get too much weight against the tail gate of the box you will be staring at the sky.

When you search for trucks you look for the cab axle measurement it goes 60" swb 84" lwb and 108' extra long wheelbase. You want a truck with the 84 cab axle which should be around a 161wb with a regular cab truck.

iluvscag
07-27-2005, 10:50 AM
The FORD, BUILT FORD TOUGH. :)

Markf
07-27-2005, 04:11 PM
Smalltimer,
It has approx 95K (definitely below 100k) on it. What is SCA? Thx.
Mark

Shadetree Ltd
07-27-2005, 08:07 PM
You should see anywhere from 10-13mpg with a F-350 4x4 dump with IDI power and 5spd you may beable to squeek 15mpg out of it. The problem with the swb trucks with the 8' boxes is the front wheels lift off the ground giving you light steering. The F-350s with the 161wb with a 10' box you can get enough weight forward so the truck handles good it also rides better.

I was looking at the truckpaper.com all the F-350s 4x4s I found were swb trucks with 8' boxes they are just too short. A 9' box on a 60ca truck is even worse you get too much weight against the tail gate of the box you will be staring at the sky.

When you search for trucks you look for the cab axle measurement it goes 60" swb 84" lwb and 108' extra long wheelbase. You want a truck with the 84 cab axle which should be around a 161wb with a regular cab truck.

This statement is as false as they come. I have owned a 60" cab to axle F series for 4 years now, 3 with an F350 and now an F450. These trucks cannot handle anywhere near the weight to do such a thing. The current one has a 9' box and makes a great little dump truck for debris and materials.

Scott

Gravel Rat
07-27-2005, 09:40 PM
You must not haul much heavy material because I had a F-350 with a 9' deck used to put 3-3.5 ton on it the front wheels would get light. I had close to 3 yards of road base on the truck must have been close to 7400lbs it was heavy the old truck handled it not much brakes thou.

My lwb F-350 I used to carry 6000lbs which was a comfortable load I wouldn't want to really haul more than that the 351 had no power. My 88-450 with a 11' box would easily carry 6000lbs I had up to 9000lbs in it the truck handled it fine. I hauled lots of loads in the 7000lb range I tried not hauling the 9000lb loads the truck was grossing 17,000lbs about 2700lbs over gvw.

I have been in the trucking industry for about 12 years I'am getting back into the small scale hauling again now that the landscaping work has increased so much here. I'am currently looking for a 92-97 F-450 with a 11' box I was gonna go back to a F-350 but after I calculated what the payload would be a 350 is too light.

I have been running F-Superduty (F-450) trucks for 5 years now they pack any sized load I want only drawback is they are 2wd. With my F-350 trucks they were always overloaded and always had problems with braking power never could trust the brakes. If you didn't use the gears to slow down the brakes would overheat in a second and you would be really screwed.

In the 12 years of driving 1 ton trucks to tandem axle dumps I have learned alot one thing you learn is braking power is the most important part of the truck.

Smalltimer1
07-27-2005, 11:00 PM
Smalltimer,
It has approx 95K (definitely below 100k) on it. What is SCA? Thx.
Mark

It is a coolant additive to prevent cavitation from occurring, basically you'd need to take a sample from the radiator and have it checked. I am not an expert on it by any means, but I do know that this is pretty much the only large issue that would concern a 7.3L diesel owner. You can have it tested at a Ford dealer, and they can tell you if it has a safe level of SCA in it or not.

Gravel Rat
07-28-2005, 12:01 AM
If you do go with a IDI truck make sure the engine has had or is still using SCA in the coolant if it hasn't then you really take a risk of a engine dying of cavitation. Cavitation strikes at any time and its expensive its one of the drawbacks about the 7.3 IDIs many of them have died from it. When the engine hydrolocks it bends rods etc which in turn causes other damage.

Usually if the truck is owned by the orginal owner and you ask about SCAs and they give you a blank stare ;) then reconsider the truck.

Shadetree Ltd
07-28-2005, 12:37 AM
In a short haul urgent situation the truck carried 4 yards of wet sand no problem. I am also running powerstrokes and 4X4 though. I upgraded to the 450 for the additional braking power. The 350 doesn't compare in its ability to brake. The 450 with the 6.0 powerstroke, tow/haul and intergrated brake controller is incredible. I am able to stop a 7500 pound trailer in distances so short they are comparable to an unloaded 1 ton. The new front suspension on the new wheelbase is also great for its turning radius.

Scott

Gravel Rat
07-28-2005, 01:12 AM
The new 450s are really nice but I can't afford the 50,000 dollar price tag a I know one guy that bought a 04 F-450 2wd with a flatdeck cost 58,000 dollars.

I'am really curious on how the new coil spring suspension is working on the 05 trucks I know its a suspension based on the old 77-79 F-150.

The 2002 F-550 I used to drive for a company it didn't turn very sharp and it rode rough. It actually wasn't a comfortable truck to drive.

Smalltimer1
07-28-2005, 01:37 AM
I'am really curious on how the new coil spring suspension is working on the 05 trucks I know its a suspension based on the old 77-79 F-150.

Actually the 67-79 F-100/150 4x4 front ends were pretty much identical with the coil springs. All 67-79 F-100/150 4x4 front ends and 65-79 F-100/150/250/350 4x2 front ends can be interchanged without much effort. All the F-250HD and F-350 4x4's of those years had leaf springs. Believe me when I say it, the only thing even remotely similar is the appearance of the springs when compared to the new ones.

If you want disc brakes on the front end of your 65-79 F-100/150/250/350 truck you can swap the I-beams straight from a 77-79 truck into a earlier year truck and it is plug'n'play.

The 2002 F-550 I used to drive for a company it didn't turn very sharp and it rode rough. It actually wasn't a comfortable truck to drive.

The problem with that set up was the axle itself was recessed way up into the chassis, restricting the turning radius. However, no 1 1/2 or 2 ton and up truck is going to ride very well unless it has an air suspension. For example the Chevy C-70 we use rides terrible until you put 5 tons in it. Then it smoothes out some, but the cab still has some harshness as far as transmitting road vibration and roughness to the seat. Since you have an older F-450 you can see where the actual axle drops down like a transfer truck while the new ones can hardly be seen in the undercarriage.

Shadetree Ltd
07-28-2005, 01:46 AM
The new 450s are really nice but I can't afford the 50,000 dollar price tag a I know one guy that bought a 04 F-450 2wd with a flatdeck cost 58,000 dollars.

I'am really curious on how the new coil spring suspension is working on the 05 trucks I know its a suspension based on the old 77-79 F-150.

The 2002 F-550 I used to drive for a company it didn't turn very sharp and it rode rough. It actually wasn't a comfortable truck to drive.

I haven't worked the front end yet, I will be hanging a 9.5' V plow on it this winter so I will find out soon. With the tight turning radius I can get this thing anywhere with a 20 enclosed trailer. I paid almost 10% less than your friend for an 05 6L, auto, air, pto, snow prep, heavy service, intergrated brake controller, upfitter switches, split seat, class V hitch and 9' dump.

Scott

UNISCAPER
07-28-2005, 02:01 AM
Of the years you are looking at, the Chjevy has the gutless wonder for an engine and trash for brakes.

The Ford has a better engine, but a rubber band that belongs in a Mustang for a transmission.

Of the two, brakes are cheaper to fix than a tranny, but all in all, in that year, I would go Ford. The other thing regarding a 450, the truck virtually looks the same as the F-350, the only difference in regulation is it will need a heavier weight classification on the plate and is litterally twice the truck as the F-350.

Gravel Rat
07-28-2005, 03:14 AM
I know with the 88 to 97 F-Superduty (450) trucks do look like a F-350 4x4 I have people asking me if my truck is a 4x4. The newer F-450s do stand out a little because of the 19.5 wheels which is the first thing the DOT notices especially when you go whipping by the highway scale you were supposed to stop at. The police also know this when you are parked in a residential area where trucks with gvws over 12,000lbs are not allowed to park at overnight. Or you are in residential areas where commercial trucks are not supposed to be.

There are quite a few rules you have to know about when you own a truck with a gvw greater than 12,000lbs which seems to be the common gvw in most areas. You can run a big azz RV through the neighbourhood twice the size of a F-450 dump truck but the RVs gvw is at or under 12,000lbs so they have no problems.

I live in a rural area so I don't have to worry about city regulations but when I do go to the largest city close to me I do have to remember I can't park anywhere I please because of weight restrictions on residential streets.

Smalltimer1
07-28-2005, 12:03 PM
The Ford has a better engine, but a rubber band that belongs in a Mustang for a transmission.

Of the two, brakes are cheaper to fix than a tranny, but all in all, in that year, I would go Ford. The other thing regarding a 450, the truck virtually looks the same as the F-350, the only difference in regulation is it will need a heavier weight classification on the plate and is litterally twice the truck as the F-350.

The transmission should be fine as long as the fluid has been changed and is not allowed to heat up to extremes. There's a bunch of trucks here with the E40D with 150k plus on original transmissions. Not flat ground either. Heat is the killer in these. Doing a lot of idling in gear around and moving less than 25mph for long periods of time (30+ mins) will do it.

A good investment is a trans. temperature gauge, which is factory on the new ones. This will help you save your trans. Max safe temp. is around 210-220 degrees. After that shut it off, otherwise that fluid will get cooked and so will everything else.

Another wise investment would be a deeper tranny pan. The best one I've seen is by Mag-Hytec, which has one with cooling fins actually on the pan, so you benefit from more fluid capacity as well as better cooling, as compared to the stock shallow non-finned pan. More fluid capacity means you can have more time if you need to be moving slow for a long period of time without the risk of higher trans. temperatures.

If you still feel the need for improvement, a Banks Transcommand would also be a great investment. It does a lot better job at shifting the transmission than the stock programming. The E40D's logic is to keep the engine at the lowest RPM's possible for better fuel economy and lower emissions (thank you EPA :rolleyes: )

A B&M shift kit is also a great way to improve the shift quality of it as well.

Overall the E40D isn't bad, its only true issue is the difficulty it has to dissipate heat buildup, which can be solved through the deeper tranny pan and possibly an auxiliary trans. cooler.

climber
07-28-2005, 02:48 PM
Get the Ford so when you scratch it or dent it you wont feel bad. No I'm JK.
I would go with the 3500HD chevy gmc same thing. We have one and it has been realy reliable for us, but we only do tree work and some lawns so I dont know about the PTO because we use the electric verson. Hope I help to help you make the right discesson ;-)

UNISCAPER
07-28-2005, 08:44 PM
Actually, the E4OD, the 4R100, and the new prize the Torque shift were all designed so when you use revese speed gear, the fuild will not circulate through the cooler and sits dormant inside the passages. What usually happens on the E4OD and 4R100 is the front seal blows out from boiling oil. The Torqueshift has exploding outer cases. They need to reinvent their transmissions altogether because what they have sure is not worth a crap...

Smalltimer1
07-29-2005, 02:54 AM
Actually, the E4OD, the 4R100, and the new prize the Torque shift were all designed so when you use revese speed gear, the fuild will not circulate through the cooler and sits dormant inside the passages. What usually happens on the E4OD and 4R100 is the front seal blows out from boiling oil. The Torqueshift has exploding outer cases. They need to reinvent their transmissions altogether because what they have sure is not worth a crap...

The fluid wouldn't get that hot if they weren't run like a scalded dog.

The truck I am going to buy has a TS in it, I drove it a while back for 300 miles over a weekend and did some light work with it and the trans. temp gauge never got over 190, even in reverse, backing out of the dump bottom. I'm not saying there's nothing wrong with these transmissions, but quite frankly, no one manufacturer is perfect.

I went yesterday and looked at a '04 Chevy 3500 8.1L at the local dealer with a new replacement Allison in it with only 20k on the whole truck. I asked the salesman what happened with the first one, he said the solenoids were shot and the guy traded it with the bum tranny so they replaced it. I wonder if this is a common problem, I've heard some other guys say that these Allison 1000's don't hold up to the name Allison once had years ago.

Maybe Ford will get up with Eaton Fuller and get one of their trans. in their trucks. But the TS isn't bad, several folks over on The Diesel Stop have gotten over 100k on their 6L PSD/TS without any problems, one guy has already hit 260k on his as well, trouble free. In fact, I'd be willing to bet the TS has the same failure rate or less than the Allison.

In fact the Allison 1000 is only rated for 590 lbs. of input torque, while the Dura-diesel is making 605. That alone would shy me away from it.

The TS fluid lines are twice the size of the 4R100's and E40D's. It also has an external filter.