Bought a New Ram - No Thinking Required

[denverpilot]

You could call Rob at Maxtorq in Golden CO and see if he’s used the AFE thing. He’d answer that question about quality if he has. He’s a C-130 guy so y’all can talk turboprops. LOL.

As far as the noise, it’s funny you want it louder. I watched one go by last weekend in a parking lot and thought “man, that’s so much nicer than the 5.9...” and a 5.9 had just left the lot a few minutes earlier.

Maybe they needed a happy medium. LOL.

 

[chartbundle]

No the 4x4 wasn't engaged, lol. It also had a small fuel tank which made the range fairly poor. I think the most I squeezed into it was 16 gallons after the fuel light came on. Maybe I'm just used to 25-26 gallon fill ups and 415+ mile range in my F-150 or the fuel light in the Nissan comes on really early.

Annoyingly the Chevy has the 4WD switch in a hard to see position, and can be easily bumped, and no light on the dash, so I've on occasion wondered why I was getting 23... and reached over and flipped the switch back to 2WD.

Mine is about 20 gallons, which gives me 500+ miles, which, like my plane, is way longer than my personal range. But it is nice to know I can drive to Boise if I really need to without getting fuel, or more importantly make a trip to see my family in California and only once have to pay overpriced California Diesel prices.

 

[Ted]

You could call Rob at Maxtorq in Golden CO and see if he’s used the AFE thing. He’d answer that question about quality if he has. He’s a C-130 guy so y’all can talk turboprops. LOL.

Yeah, although I hate to call someone like that and just ask the question when I’m not planning on buying something from him anytime soon.

As far as the noise, it’s funny you want it louder. I watched one go by last weekend in a parking lot and thought “man, that’s so much nicer than the 5.9...” and a 5.9 had just left the lot a few minutes earlier.

Maybe they needed a happy medium. LOL.

I felt like my 2004.5 had that happy medium. I never modified it! When I see a fully deleted 24 valve 5.9 like your old one yeah, it’s annoyingly loud. The common rail 5.9 engines starting in 2003 were a lot quieter.

When I’m next to some of the newer trucks they seem obnoxious when they have a ton of mods and are pushing way too much power. Really I want to hear the engine more. If I’m sitting in the truck with the engine idling, I can barely hear it. Going down the road I don’t hear much. Hard acceleration I don’t hear as much as I should.

I don’t know what it’s like driving next to it when it’s under hard acceleration, but idling you hear precisely zero exhaust noise, and that’s my main complaint. When I listen to videos of other trucks, what’s really missing on mine is exhaust sound.

 

[denverpilot]

Yeah just for accuracy my 5.9 wasn’t fully deleted. It had a 4” pipe to a muffler that didn’t seem to do much then 4” to the back.

It was just loud. The full deleted ones are ridiculous. LOL.

 

[SoonerAviator]

Annoyingly the Chevy has the 4WD switch in a hard to see position, and can be easily bumped, and no light on the dash, so I've on occasion wondered why I was getting 23... and reached over and flipped the switch back to 2WD.

Mine is about 20 gallons, which gives me 500+ miles, which, like my plane, is way longer than my personal range. But it is nice to know I can drive to Boise if I really need to without getting fuel, or more importantly make a trip to see my family in California and only once have to pay overpriced California Diesel prices.

Yeah, no mistaking the 4WD setting in the Frontier. Easily visible and dash lights for 4WD and 4x4 Low range. It just felt dated, got poor gas mileage, and being the base model it didn’t have anything luxurious about it. Get this, I generally make my trip down to FTW at night due to leaving after I get the kiddos down to bed. I generally turn down (or off, if able) all of the dash lights and radio screens to help night vision. The Frontier’s radio screen would light up every time a new song played on my phone. Didn’t matter if it was Spotify or phone library, USB cable or Bluetooth. Crap like that annoys me to no end, lol.

 

[Ted]

Yeah just for accuracy my 5.9 wasn’t fully deleted. It had a 4” pipe to a muffler that didn’t seem to do much then 4” to the back.

It was just loud. The full deleted ones are ridiculous. LOL.

My F-350 was fully deleted and when I bought it had a short straight 3.5" exhaust that just dumped out under the cab. That was stupid and annoying.

I then put a 4" exhaust with a muffler on and that was ok. Of course the PSD 6.0 has a "unique" sound to it, so in that case the exhaust note wasn't desirable.

When I listen to in-cab videos, the 5" without the muffler is still nice in the cab, but I imagine it's obnoxious for people around. I don't want to be TOO obnoxious...

 

[FormerHangie]

The thing I like about SXM is the integration with the truck's radio/entertainment system. It is very well integrated and it'll even give me alerts if favorite songs or favorite artists are playing. The nice thing about that is that after you get that list populated there's almost always something playing that you want to listen to. The integration is really nice. Although I don't use it frequently I can hit the voice command and tell it which station to tune to, it has the big touch screen for radio, steering wheel controls, all nice stuff that works well.

Because of that, I'd rather use it than go to something else that would be a third party setup, at least for now.

I have Sirius XM in my Fusion, and I use it a good bit. I've never used the alert feature, if I want to listen to a favorite song or artist I have it on a thumb drive, which currently has 3800 songs.

One daughter has Apple Music, the other one uses Spotify. My wife has both Sirius and Apple Music, and she mostly listens Sirius in the car.

Sirius has a lot of content that appeals to the over 50 crowd.

 

[Ted]

Sirius has a lot of content that appeals to the over 50 crowd.

One of my favorites, and I'm sure @SCCutler 's as well.

Also commonly played on SXM

 

[Ted]

So I've been pondering a question and wondering if the peanut gallery has input.

As I've mentioned previously, I want more engine sound. But I really would rather avoid doing emissions deletes to get that if I can. I know I'd be happy with the performance and sound result if I did. I also like my truck not being smelly. I still do a lot of sitting with it idling... at the bus stop, letting it warm up in the winter, etc. I've had enough smelly diesels that in this case, I'm happier not doing that, specifically with my kids sitting in the truck with me. So I am considering two things:

1) Grid heater delete. This removes the grid heater that is used to help cold start emissions. This is for emissions purposes solely. Cummins doesn't put them on the industrial or emissions-exempt versions of this engine. Last winter I tried doing starts without the grid heater and it started fine, and reports say that unless you live in or go to super cold climates, it's really not needed. I also try to plug the truck in if it's below 40. This is what happens when you do the grid heater delete:

As you can see, that factory grid heater includes a whole lot of restriction, and areas that would reflect sound.

2) Upgrade the intake elbow. The intake elbow comes from the intercooler out pipe and then feeds into the grid heater/intake. Here shows the stock vs. the aftermarket one:

The above is the one I'd be buying. The below shoes the non-EGR version next to the stock one:



And here's an image of the underside:

The much larger openings on the grid heater delete and the aftermarket intake elbow I think would help to increase engine noise, as well as the reduced turbo lag/improved throttle response, which are all things people report.

The truck already has the S&B intake on it:



Which has improved throttle response as well as increased turbo/engine noise noticeably, but it's still not at the level I would like. Here's another shot that shows the intake elbow:



So, thoughts? Am I going to notice a difference if I do the above two items in sound? Almost nobody buys this EGR intake elbow as most people who are doing performance improvements on their Rams are just going ahead and doing the emissions deletes so there's no good data there. And it seems everyone who did the grid heater delete already did the emissions deletes, so not much for data there, and they aren't really talking about the sound aspect. Most people are just interested in more smoke and more horsepower from what I can tell.

 

[Zeldman]

I also like my truck not being smelly.

Blasphemy..!!!

The exhaust smell is one of the bonuses of owning a diesel burner.

 

[Ted]

Blasphemy..!!!

The exhaust smell is one of the bonuses of owning a diesel burner.

Sure, but that needs to be something you can get away from when you want it. The whiff of diesel exhaust on a crisp fall morning must release a massive amount of dopamine in my brain, it just makes me happy and feel good.

But my F-350's exhaust (it was fully deleted) made my lungs burn if the breeze was blowing the wrong direction. My 6.5 was similar, and I grew up breathing the smokey exhaust of Detroit 6V92s blowing right out at street level from old GM RTS II busses. Granted those were unhealthy engines and so no doubt their emissions were noticeably worse than my Cummins would be if deleted, but the Ram remains a daily driver that does get a good bit of sitting and idling, it's not something where I just hop in and go, at least not at this phase of the game with waiting at the end of the driveway to put kids on the bus, etc. It's still a daily driver not a toy like an old semi would be.

 

[Ted]

Yesterday I decided to spend a little effort addressing one of the minor nuisances of the truck, namely the rattling/buzzing that the transmission makes with the solid shift lever. That was a known quantity when I got it, but I figured it could get improved. I did a couple things:

1) I added some Dynamat (well, Rockmat - cheap Dynamat) around the shift lever under the shift boot. I figured this would absorb some of the vibrations.

2) I pulled the Momo shifter off and took a look at how it sits over the shift lever. Momo includes a bunch of rubber isolators, which you do need because the shift knob is a larger diameter than the shift lever. The shift knob I used:

Is pretty long, and the shift lever goes pretty much up to the center of the top. So I took one of those rubber isolators, cut the top off of it, put it on the shift lever, and then had that isolating the bottom of the shift knob, the idea being reducing the amount of vibrations that could get transmitted directly to the knob, which was definitely occurring.

The two have made a difference in reducing the annoying frequencies while still allowing the enjoyable gear noise that I like. So, that's a good thing.

I also am planning on changing the transmission fluid, hopefully tonight or else over the weekend, replacing the ATF (why did the transmission get ATF?!) with proper manual transmission fluid as is recommended by Mercedes (who built the transmission) and the companies that rebuild the things. That may also reduce the undesired noises some.

 

[denverpilot]

Amazing they did ATF. On the manual on the 5.9 they had some special Mopar juice you were supposed to use when new.

Folks figured out later that a high quality synthetic manual trans fluid worked better. Temperatures were lower.

Of course on that manual it also didn’t have proper ports cut to lubricate 6th gear and Dodge warned against towing in overdrive, so when the trans was eventually rebuilt — you had lubrication channels cut to the back of it. Splashing wasn’t enough towing heavy and in high gears.

Anyway, good call on looking up what Mercedes says about the new one. Dodge never seems to be able to get their chit together on manuals and proper fluids for heavy duty pickups.

 

[Zeldman]

replacing the ATF (why did the transmission get ATF?!)

Fuel mileage maybe.??

My Subaru calls for 0W20 in the motor and the all knowing me put 5W20 in. Gas mileage went from 26 in town to 23. I put 0W20 in and in a couple weeks the gas mileage was back.

Many years back I added a quart of 90 weight to an old 283 I had. Great oil pressure.!!

 

[Ted]

Fuel mileage maybe.??

My Subaru calls for 0W20 in the motor and the all knowing me put 5W20 in. Gas mileage went from 26 in town to 23. I put 0W20 in and in a couple weeks the gas mileage was back.

Yeah, I actually knew the answer to the question. It was a few reasons.

ATF does reduce friction and I suspect gets better mileage. That said, 3/4 and 1-ton trucks I don't think fall under CAFE standards (at least not as stringently), but that might've been some of it. The bigger thing, though, is that the thinner oil tends to produce less "truck-like" shifts. A lot of these people aren't semi drivers and don't necessarily like the heavier shifting of a semi truck type transmission. Even with the ATF, when the transmission is cold in the winter I've had to double-clutch on the upshift because the input shaft slows down too much with the cold fluid.

The problem with the ATF is that when it gets hot on hot days (like here in Kansas), it shifts poorly and is more prone to grinding or just not feeling like it shifts in well. What's also happening in the background is that the oil is too thin under heavy loads and is breaking down between the surfaces it needs to protect. Hence why Mercedes didn't put ATF in the G56 themselves and doesn't recommend it. I think Chrysler was probably looking at less of a duty cycle than what a lot of owners do. For how I drive the truck, I'd likely be fine with the ATF overall, but given that I don't like how it shifts when it gets hot out and I figure it's not good for the transmission, it makes sense to change it out.

It's worth noting ATF is not inherently an invalid fluid in a manual transmission and a lot of "modern" manual transmissions use it. But one has to look at the total story behind the use of the transmission.

 

[Bill]

It's worth noting ATF is not inherently an invalid fluid in a manual transmission and a lot of "modern" manual transmissions use it. But one has to look at the total story behind the use of the transmission.

Some earlier Hondas spec'd engine oil in the manual transmissions. The '87 Acura Integra used 10w30 engine oil in the transmission.

 

[Ted]

Some earlier Hondas spec'd engine oil in the manual transmissions. The '87 Acura Integra used 10w30 engine oil in the transmission.

Right. A manual transmission is ultimately just a gearbox. The synchros change that up a bit if so equipped, and hence why there are various transmission fluids which in some cases have friction modifiers. However you don't have the issues of dealing with things like combustion gasses or super high temperatures (in general), so it mainly comes down to lubricating the surfaces properly and providing the appropriate protection.

 

[denverpilot]

... so it mainly comes down to lubricating the surfaces properly and providing the appropriate protection.

Trying really hard not to get banned after you put it that way...

Don’t say it. Don’t say it...

 

[Bill]

Trying really hard not to get banned after you put it that way...

Don’t say it. Don’t say it...

This stuff?

 

[Ted]

Trying really hard not to get banned after you put it that way...

Don’t say it. Don’t say it...

Nate, your mind is as dirty as the oil in your old Cummins turbo diesel.

 

[RyanB]

Nate, your mind is as dirty as the oil in your old Cummins turbo diesel.

Hahaha!

 

[MIFlyer]

Yeah, I actually knew the answer to the question. It was a few reasons.

ATF does reduce friction and I suspect gets better mileage. That said, 3/4 and 1-ton trucks I don't think fall under CAFE standards (at least not as stringently), but that might've been some of it. The bigger thing, though, is that the thinner oil tends to produce less "truck-like" shifts. A lot of these people aren't semi drivers and don't necessarily like the heavier shifting of a semi truck type transmission. Even with the ATF, when the transmission is cold in the winter I've had to double-clutch on the upshift because the input shaft slows down too much with the cold fluid.

The problem with the ATF is that when it gets hot on hot days (like here in Kansas), it shifts poorly and is more prone to grinding or just not feeling like it shifts in well. What's also happening in the background is that the oil is too thin under heavy loads and is breaking down between the surfaces it needs to protect. Hence why Mercedes didn't put ATF in the G56 themselves and doesn't recommend it. I think Chrysler was probably looking at less of a duty cycle than what a lot of owners do. For how I drive the truck, I'd likely be fine with the ATF overall, but given that I don't like how it shifts when it gets hot out and I figure it's not good for the transmission, it makes sense to change it out.

It's worth noting ATF is not inherently an invalid fluid in a manual transmission and a lot of "modern" manual transmissions use it. But one has to look at the total story behind the use of the transmission.

an option might be to run ATF winter, 90W summer? or, get a really good synthetic manual (redline?) that will be thinner than dino 90W when cold, but keep it's protection up when hot

 

[denverpilot]

Nate, your mind is as dirty as the oil in your old Cummins turbo diesel.

That’d be the new owner’s problem. I sold it a while ago.

 

[Ted]

an option might be to run ATF winter, 90W summer? or, get a really good synthetic manual (redline?) that will be thinner than dino 90W when cold, but keep it's protection up when hot

That would be one option, although for how little I drive that would mean a lot of fluid changes at much less than required interval. The manual says 60k (which I think is too long) but then I’d be doing 6k changes.

I figure I’ll see how the Pennzoil does and then decide. Another option some people do is adding a transmission oil cooler.

That’d be the new owner’s problem. I sold it a while ago.

Yeah, I realized after I hit “post” I should’ve said “former” but was then too lazy to hit “edit.”

 

[MIFlyer]

That would be one option, although for how little I drive that would mean a lot of fluid changes at much less than required interval. The manual says 60k (which I think is too long) but then I’d be doing 6k changes.

I figure I’ll see how the Pennzoil does and then decide. Another option some people do is adding a transmission oil cooler.



Yeah, I realized after I hit “post” I should’ve said “former” but was then too lazy to hit “edit.”

yeesh, you didn't mention penzoil.

need me to send you an oil pan scraper for Christmas?

 

[Ted]

yeesh, you didn't mention penzoil.

need me to send you an oil pan scraper for Christmas?

I've never been a fan of Pennzoil for motor oil and have never put it in any engine I own. However, their Synchromesh oil is apparently actually good and receives pretty high marks from a number of independent sources, so I'm willing to give it a try because of that. At the very least, I think it'll be better than ATF.

While there are a lot of debates on which fluid to use, the consistent recommendation is to overfill it. Some say put in 7 quarts (it's supposed to take 6) some say 8 quarts. I was going to aim for 7. Because the fill plug is at the 6 quart line, you have to do some sort of trickery to get the 7th quart in. Some people remove the shifter and put the fluid in through the cabin. Some people jack up the side of the truck and that gives room. I looked at how the truck and transmission were sitting and I figured if I backed into my driveway that should give enough angle that it would probably work out. I was mostly right - I got in about 6.7 quarts before it started coming out the side. Well, that's close enough in my book, especially since the pump I was using wouldn't get the bottom few tens anyway. We'll see if I notice a different driving tomorrow.

I figure I'll at least run this fluid a year and see what I think. Some people recommend thicker oil, or a mix of some thicker oil combined with some of the other synchromesh oil. My truck doesn't see heavy towing, at least not with any regularity, and the power remains stock and I expect will remain stock. So getting off of the ATF I think will help the longevity, the real question will be how the thing shifts. There are more hot days this week so I should get an opportunity to see if there's an improvement in shifting.

The magnetic drain plug did have shavings on it, but I suppose I would consider what it had to be reasonable. No chunks (as you'd hope), just standard metal goo.

Facebook also reminded me that today was officially 2 years since I took delivery of the truck. This morning my odometer read 33,000 miles almost on the dot (a few miles over) when I got in to get to work. She's got a few scratches but mostly dust from dusty gravel roads. I'll say she's held up pretty well, especially considering the 3 kids that I'm usually carting around.

 

[MIFlyer]

I've never been a fan of Pennzoil for motor oil and have never put it in any engine I own. However, their Synchromesh oil is apparently actually good and receives pretty high marks from a number of independent sources, so I'm willing to give it a try because of that. At the very least, I think it'll be better than ATF.

While there are a lot of debates on which fluid to use, the consistent recommendation is to overfill it. Some say put in 7 quarts (it's supposed to take 6) some say 8 quarts. I was going to aim for 7. Because the fill plug is at the 6 quart line, you have to do some sort of trickery to get the 7th quart in. Some people remove the shifter and put the fluid in through the cabin. Some people jack up the side of the truck and that gives room. I looked at how the truck and transmission were sitting and I figured if I backed into my driveway that should give enough angle that it would probably work out. I was mostly right - I got in about 6.7 quarts before it started coming out the side. Well, that's close enough in my book, especially since the pump I was using wouldn't get the bottom few tens anyway. We'll see if I notice a different driving tomorrow.

I figure I'll at least run this fluid a year and see what I think. Some people recommend thicker oil, or a mix of some thicker oil combined with some of the other synchromesh oil. My truck doesn't see heavy towing, at least not with any regularity, and the power remains stock and I expect will remain stock. So getting off of the ATF I think will help the longevity, the real question will be how the thing shifts. There are more hot days this week so I should get an opportunity to see if there's an improvement in shifting.

The magnetic drain plug did have shavings on it, but I suppose I would consider what it had to be reasonable. No chunks (as you'd hope), just standard metal goo.

Facebook also reminded me that today was officially 2 years since I took delivery of the truck. This morning my odometer read 33,000 miles almost on the dot (a few miles over) when I got in to get to work. She's got a few scratches but mostly dust from dusty gravel roads. I'll say she's held up pretty well, especially considering the 3 kids that I'm usually carting around.

as long as the metal was less than a 1/4 tsp, Lycoming would say you don't have to tear it down, eh

 

[denverpilot]

They’re still needing to do tbe overfill thing? You’d think they’d have fixed that in yours.

Mine was overfilled. Have to pour it down the shift tower. So stupid. But it made a significant difference in temperature and failure rates.

 

[Ted]

as long as the metal was less than a 1/4 tsp, Lycoming would say you don't have to tear it down, eh

I didn't measure an exact amount, but it wasn't much. As is typically the case with a magnetic drain plug you get a fun pattern of the metal bits. But nothing that I'd be worried about. This is the first fluid change this transmission has seen and some metal is normal anyway, so I didn't see signs of problems.

They’re still needing to do tbe overfill thing? You’d think they’d have fixed that in yours.

Mine was overfilled. Have to pour it down the shift tower. So stupid. But it made a significant difference in temperature and failure rates.

You had an NV5600 (which of course you know, but others might not), which is a completely different transmission from the G56 with no similarities other than they have 6 speeds. The NV5600 at least had some sort of gear oil in it from the factory instead of ATF. I never heard about overfilling the NV5600 but admittedly I wasn't as active on the forums and I kept that truck 100% stock the whole time I had it. I also always towed in 6th gear (which I remember you said was something you were told to avoid), and the transmission had no problems. At some point my friend who bought it did have to replace the tailshaft, but it seemed from my understanding that was caused not by any sort of use but because he hit something.

Looking at the transmission last night, I do have a bit of a theory as to what at least part of the problem may be. When I look under the truck, the transmission is at a downward angle just slightly, or appears to be. I'm not sure what Mercedes designed it to, but I'm guessing the general casting is more or less universal. So my thought is that what may be happening is the transmission is not getting adequate fluid to the forward parts of it due to the angle. Not knowing how Mercedes installs it in any other truck, hard to say, but if Chrysler is running their transmissions at an angle like that, it might be a difference.

The pure Mercedes spec is 75W-90, and I can't find anything that states what the Pennzoil is, but it's definitely thicker than the ATF that was in there. I've read some people say it's a consistency similar to 5W-30. I'm not sure if it's quite that thin, but also not sure how its viscosity changes with temperature. So I'll just try this and go thicker if I think it seems like it needs it.

The initial impression driving to work is the transmission is much happier. It is definitely quieter. Shifting seems better, but this morning was 70F or so which is usually around optimal temperature for shifting, so that may not be really representative. We'll see how it does, but definitely better than the ATF that was in there.

 

[flyingbrit]

I also always towed in 6th gear (which I remember you said was something you were told to avoid), and the transmission had no problems.

Yeah, whatever gear is direct drive is normally best for towing. Minimal stress on all the gears and bearings that way.

 

[CJones]

I had a slight 'rattle' in the Jeep when at idle. I went with RP Syncromax and it took most of the rattle away. I haven't noticed any 'thin oil side effects' since moving south with it.

 

[Ted]

Yeah, whatever gear is direct drive is normally best for towing. Minimal stress on all the gears and bearings that way.

That's the conventional wisdom especially in the early days of overdrives where the overdrive gear was very wimpy. Early 700R4s were known for being bad towing transmission in overdrive, for example.

While direct drive still remains more stout than overdrive, over the years they've improved transmission designs strength wise. Even the now venerable GM 4L80E was designed strong enough to be able to tow in overdrive. I owned several of those and towed many miles in overdrive, no issues. Even the 4L60E

For Nate in his (former) dually towing the giant 5th wheel camper with the NV5600 maybe it made sense, I don't know, but I still probably would've used overdrive just because. In my 3/4-ton Ram with the NV5600 I used overdrive for towing all the time, loaded or not, never had an issue. In 108k miles I owned it I'd say 50-75% of those were towing. Based on this I'll still tow with my current Ram in overdrive.

 

[Grum.Man]

I think the whole not towing in overdrive is a bit of a wives tale. Towing in overdrive isn't what wears it out, it's constantly shifting that wears it out. As long as it has the power to maintain the gear for the most part you aren't going to hurt the transmission.

 

[Grum.Man]

That's the conventional wisdom especially in the early days of overdrives where the overdrive gear was very wimpy. Early 700R4s were known for being bad towing transmission in overdrive, for example.

While direct drive still remains more stout than overdrive, over the years they've improved transmission designs strength wise. Even the now venerable GM 4L80E was designed strong enough to be able to tow in overdrive. I owned several of those and towed many miles in overdrive, no issues. Even the 4L60E

For Nate in his (former) dually towing the giant 5th wheel camper with the NV5600 maybe it made sense, I don't know, but I still probably would've used overdrive just because. In my 3/4-ton Ram with the NV5600 I used overdrive for towing all the time, loaded or not, never had an issue. In 108k miles I owned it I'd say 50-75% of those were towing. Based on this I'll still tow with my current Ram in overdrive.

The main problem with the 700R4 was the valve body tuning to make the shifts so smooth. They dialed the gear changes back so far it just wore the clutches out in the transmission. A properly tuned 700R4 is pretty dang stout and will last a long time.

 

[Ted]

I think the whole not towing in overdrive is a bit of a wives tale. Towing in overdrive isn't what wears it out, it's constantly shifting that wears it out. As long as it has the power to maintain the gear for the most part you aren't going to hurt the transmission.

The main problem with the 700R4 was the valve body tuning to make the shifts so smooth. They dialed the gear changes back so far it just wore the clutches out in the transmission. A properly tuned 700R4 is pretty dang stout and will last a long time.

I was never an automatic transmission guy but I do recall we had some catastrophic failures of overdrives on 700R4s. But it's been a long time, so I can't speak to details anymore. I do largely believe that it's a bit of a wive's tale, but you do need to look at specifics of the engine, transmission and what you're doing.

A lot of people complained about the NV5600s back when they were new (and on G56s) but I also bet that a lot of those failures were from people with the power turned way up and towing big heavy hauls or otherwise abusing things. I've got good mechanical sympathy and don't abuse my vehicles like you see on YouTube.

 

[weilke]

Drove a International medium duty truck for 1400 miles Sun/Mon. You should ask them what they are doing to create exhaust noise out of a Cummins.....

 

[Ted]

Drove a International medium duty truck for 1400 miles Sun/Mon. You should ask them what they are doing to create exhaust noise out of a Cummins.....

I'm surprised an International has a Cummins in it at a medium duty level. I thought it wasn't until you got into the heavy duty level that they started putting in Cats or Cummins.

 

[weilke]

I'm surprised an International has a Cummins in it at a medium duty level. I thought it wasn't until you got into the heavy duty level that they started putting in Cats or Cummins.

I was surprised . I thought they used their home-brew engine in the medium duty units. This may be a custom order for Penske. I started driving and thought 'transmission feels odd'. Turns out they use a Eaton double clutch design similar to what you would find in most VW group passenger cars.

 

[Ted]

I was surprised . I thought they used their home-brew engine in the medium duty units. This may be a custom order for Penske. I started driving and thought 'transmission feels odd'. Turns out they use a Eaton double clutch design similar to what you would find in most VW group passenger cars.

You got me curious so I looked up to see. It like International has largely dropped a lot of their own engine lines as of a few years ago following issues that existed both on the light/medium duty truck side as well as the larger heavy duty truck side. I can't say I'm entirely surprised. The PowerStroke 6.0 and 6.4 (marketed as the VT365 and I forget what the 6.4 was) were problematic on the Ford side and I imagine moreso on the International side with the higher duty cycle those engines will normally get by virtue of what they're in and what they do.

It seems like International has now basically repowered the trucks with Cummins. I wonder if they're going to keep that relationship going or try to revive their own engine division. It seems like 2000 and later they really just couldn't build something that would handle emissions and be reliable. Not that others haven't had their teething pains - they have - but International most of all.

 

[weilke]

You got me curious so I looked up to see. It like International has largely dropped a lot of their own engine lines as of a few years ago following issues that existed both on the light/medium duty truck side as well as the larger heavy duty truck side.

Well, it's RED !



I was also suprised to find full up 2 circuit air-brakes in a medium duty chassis. The last one I rented had hydraulic brakes with electrical booster and a slushbox transmission.

You notice how they get the engine noise into the cab. No sound-mats on the firewall...