RE: A horrible New Years!!!!
10 - 9 - 8 ---- poof!
Classy.
To the OP I hope your 2010 gets off to a better start!
Keith, I have been following this thread since it first started. I think the post by kaydeejay was in reference to some political posts that have since been deleted (and rightfully so). I don't think kaydeejay was trying to make light of the plight of the OP.
RE: My block heater normal?
Ok, ok,ok, I have to eat a ton of crow and sincerly appolagize. I finally found my missing block heater. I went out with my camera and took a bunch of pics and when I looked at them there it was. When I ordered the truck the dealer told me it didn't have one and that I did not need it. I LIVE AND LEARN. I also could not see it by just laying on the ground and looking up. Guess I needed to put it on a lift to get a different angle. I eat crow on this one.
No worries!! I've had to eat lots of crow around here as well! :B
You may never need it for starting issues, but it is nice for faster warmups on frigid mornings! From what I hear, if you decide to buy the cord, get it from cummins directly, or on Ebay. The stealers like to charge a hefty price for it.
Have a good one!
RE: Dodge Durango
Durango like all short wheel base SUV's are very limited in their towing ability. Fine for a tent trailer or a hybrid trailer, but I would not again tow a regular trailer with one. They are simply put too limited in their GVWR and GCWR numbers. Couple that with a rather short wheel base and you are asking for more problems than you will be able to count.
Have to disagree with the above. And with an 8900lb towing capacity, it is simply incorrect to say the Durango is limited by its GCWR. Assuming you have 1000 lbs of family and 1000 lbs of stuff in your trailer, you still have a healthy 6900 lbs of towing to spare. I think a Durango would work well with a 20 to 25 foot 4,000 to 6,000 pound TT. It SURELY isn't limited to just a tent trailer.
And, the folks at Edmunds disagree with Don also, placing the Durango 4th in a 2004 or 05 top 10 towing listing.
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/list/top10/102426/article.html
Granted, the list is 5 years old, but still the Durango has capabilities not limited to towing just a tent trailer.
Not trying to start an argument, but have you ever towed a 25 foot or even a 21 foot TT with a short wheel base SUV?
Putting 1000 pounds of junk into/onto your Durango reduces the net GCWR by 1000 pounds. What is the Durangos GCWR? What is a Durangos ready to camp loaded scaled weight?
No don I have never towed with a Durango. I have towed my 30 foot TT below with a Dakota quad cab, but the Dakota has a longer wheelbase than the Durango.
Also, I don't know the specific numbers for the Durango, but if the towing capacity is 8900lbs when properly equipped, it must have a pretty decent GCWR. And I factored in 1000 lbs of stuff and 1000 lbs of family in my previous post and made my TT recommendation accordingly.
I'm hoping someone who tows a TT with a Durango can chime in here, I can't believe they are as inadequate as you claim. Also, if someone has the specific weight numbers for the Durango, that would be nice to know as well.
RE: Dodge Durango
Arctic Dodge and donn0128 are dead on here. It is not a power issue at all. It is all about suspension as it relates to handling with a load. Keep in mind, all manufacturers like higher tow ratings as it sells more vehicles. Sales people are even more aggressive with weight recommendations. I have never driven a Durango but I agree it could certainly handle much more than a pop-up camper. There are a lot of variables to consider. If you are just going to meander out to local camp grounds and are not in a hurry, I may go up to a 7K pound trailer but I sure would not pull something this heavy through the mountains or on a long summer vacation unless you don't care about safety. A better tow vehicle would be something with a truck suspension. Just my 2 cent opinion.
Cyfan
You say Donn0128 is "dead on", yet you agree it can tow much more than a pop up camper? You then go on to say you would go up to a 7K lb trailer? Just who do you agree with? :h
I know all about the variables like suspension, wheelbase, and whatnot. You will note, I kept my TT recommendation to 25 foot or less for that very reason. You are correct that the soft suspension would have to be addressed, like it often has to be addressed on the larger SUVs as well like the Excursion. There are several aftermarket products available that can address the suspension issues.
I want to hear from some Durango owners who have actually towed TTs. Anyone?
RE: # 1 vehical sold in 09!!! GM trucks 309,000
Get your facts straight MARK VANDERBENT.
Another clueless RV forum post.
Not sure what you are talking about either. When combined, GM fullsize trucks do indeed outsell Ford trucks. They have for years.
Mark's facts are crystal clear, do you not understand?:h
RE: # 1 vehical sold in 09!!! GM trucks 309,000
That's if the unions haven't priced them out of competition. Dodge will be overtaken by Toyota this year from all the predictions I have been reading. Hopefully, Government Motors don't do to Silverado what they are doing to Saab, Saturn, Pontiac, Hummer, etc.
I have no idea what you are talking about. Toyota had overtaken everyone, including Ford and GM as the world's largest automaker in 2008(I think VW may win the crown for 2009). In 2008, Toyota did outsell Dodge in total truck sales, but for 2009 Dodge may retake that position by a slim margin from what I have read. And, the only reason for Toyota's truck sales numbers are Tacoma sales compared to Dakota. When you compare the Ram to the Tundra, the Ram outsells the Tundra by a HUGE margin.
But, GM STILL outsells Ford in full size truck sales. They have for many years DESPITE Ford's somewhat misleading claim as having the best selling truck.
RE: Dodge Durango
Durango like all short wheel base SUV's are very limited in their towing ability. Fine for a tent trailer or a hybrid trailer, but I would not again tow a regular trailer with one. They are simply put too limited in their GVWR and GCWR numbers. Couple that with a rather short wheel base and you are asking for more problems than you will be able to count.
Have to disagree with the above. And with an 8900lb towing capacity, it is simply incorrect to say the Durango is limited by its GCWR. Assuming you have 1000 lbs of family and 1000 lbs of stuff in your trailer, you still have a healthy 6900 lbs of towing to spare. I think a Durango would work well with a 20 to 25 foot 4,000 to 6,000 pound TT. It SURELY isn't limited to just a tent trailer.
And, the folks at Edmunds disagree with Don also, placing the Durango 4th in a 2004 or 05 top 10 towing listing.
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/list/top10/102426/article.html
Granted, the list is 5 years old, but still the Durango has capabilities not limited to towing just a tent trailer.
RE: Dodge Durango
Newer generation Durangos were 2004 to 2009. They have of course, stopped making Durangos for the time being, but have leaked pictures of the next generation Durangos due out in a year or so.
Anyway, back to the 04 to 09 models. IMO they are ugly compared to the older model, but they are larger, more capable, and have a higher towing capacity when properly equipped. Up to 8900 lbs I believe. I personally would limit the TT length to about 25 foot if it were me due to the Durango wheelbase. However, with the Hemi, power is not an issue.
RE: My block heater normal?
The 2004.5 does not even have a block heater in it.
Must have one heck of a coolant leak then.;) Seriously, I'm confident you meant it has no block heater cord. Dodge went cheap about 2004 and made it an option, about $50 IIRC. You can get one here for about $16.
At least since 1994, all 5.9's have a block heater, some just don't have the cord :B
Well, john&bet PM'd me and said he went and looked and still insists he doesn't have a block heater. I replied he must have a very unique truck/engine because it SHOULD be there.
Oh well, it's too bad for john if he doesn't have one. It's a nice feature to have for faster warmups and ease of starting in cold weather.
RE: Where and When is your first 2010 trip?
First trip of 2010 will be to the same location as our first trip the last several years. We will be going to Montauk State Park at the end of February for the March 1st opening of trout season here in Missouri. I am hoping for warm weather, as I do every year. You can see below in this pic from our 2009 trip, last year I didn't get the warmth I wished for! :E
http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j306/surveyorjp/P1010264.jpg
RE: Table Rock Lake help
If you try Table Rock State Park, do yourself a favor and DO NOT reserve any of the full hookup sites in campground 1. We did, and were packed in like sardinnes!! Campground 2 looks like it has more room between sites to me.
Table Rock is a nice enough state park I guess, but there are better state parks in Missouri for a nicer camping experience IMO. Here is an overhead pic (shot from the "Duck" ride we took!:B) of the full hookup loop in campground 1, you can see how tight the sites are.
http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j306/surveyorjp/HPIM28522.jpg
RE: The End of the Innocence
Just got back today (Friday) from being out camping since Monday. It was the most difficult camping experience I have ever had in all years I have ever camped. For the last ten years my family and I have gone to the same place every year for New Years. The last couple of years it was me and my older DD because for one reason or another DW and DD #2 could not make it. I'd kind of gotten used to that, but not totally. On Wednesday, my DW drove in, but still DD #2 had to stay back because she had to work. I have always enjoyed camping with my kids and I was so looking forward to having made a full decade of camping every year at the same place for New Years. I could tell my DD was getting a little bored and tired, but when my DW drove in, I guess it gave my DD the perfect opportunity to drive home. As you can tell they are a little older (in college). She said that she wanted to go home. Knowing that we had the extra car, and inasmuch as we (especially me) wanted her to stay, we didn't want to force her. It was just a few hours until midnight and she would have gone to sleep before that thereby having made it to the New Year. We let her go home. Gosh, did it hit me hard. It hit me like a ton of bricks. I felt terrible. I still do. Altogether we have been camping since they were babies and it finally hit home that those days are now gone. I hope to continue doing this, but I know that it will be hard and I have to get used to camping alone and/or with my wife. Maybe I'm just being sensitive, or maybe I'm just being a dad to a wonderful daughter who camped with me and kept me company for more years than what most kids will. Am I wrong for feeling this way?
Discus
With at least a couple of paragraphs your story would be easier to read,
Completely useless comment
Agree with 4*phun*2.
The OP is sharing a touching story about life. He is not submitting an article for sonora to proofread. I think sonora could have kept that comment to him/herself.
RE: My block heater normal?
Gunpilot-- I am right-- It has NO block heater. Not even an option when I ordered it. Artic use only. That was the rules at least for the first 5.9 50 state legal engines. My build date is 3 Jan.2004.
This goes against everything I have seen or read. I believe, that you indeed DO have a block heater, but just didn't get the cord. Look behind your oil filter. I think you will find the prongs to attach the cord in that location.
If I am wrong, I apologize, but I would check it out if I were you to be sure. My 03 had the heater and cord standard, and I utilized it at 20F or below because it made the cabin heat up faster than if I left it unplugged.
I am in agreement with Gunpilot.
RE: I don't know WHAT to think -- may lose my trailer!!!
I feel sorry for the OP. Not for the circumstances that she finds herself in with the problems with the dealer, but with the "holier than thou" attitudes from certain posters.
Being a senior member, the OP should have known that those attitudes would shine through like the beacon from a lighthouse on a foggy night, but that doesn't make it right. Not a single one of you knows the entire story. It's completely impossible to cover every single little detail in such a complex matter in a post on an RV forum. For those of you who think that you know what you're talking about, guess what? YOU DON'T! You only know a small piece of the puzzle. Unless you are the OP, you don't know squat.
The attitudes of some folks on this forum never cease to amaze me.There are two FACTS that are undisputed. The OP is trying to short sell a property and the OP is trying to buy an RV. That is all the information I need. It is morally and ethically wrong to say you cannot pay your debts in full (which is what a short sale is) and buy a recreational vehicle at the same time. I would love to hear the justification of anyone who feels otherwise.
bigdogger, as Banker I don't believe we have enough information to paint the OP as morally and ethically wrong. I deal with problem loans everyday and I certainly couldn't make an ethical judgment based on these meager facts. IMHO lay off the personal attacks because we're running the risk of getting this thread closed and I'd like to see how this all plays. Also, I appreciate the OP keeping us informed of the progress she is making to get this resolved.
Agree with McZippie. We do not know the entire story and surely do not have enough details to judge someone's morals and ethics.
bigdogger, you've made your feelings quite clear. Let it rest now. The rest of us want to see how this turns out.
RE: 4wd characteristics
I do agree. No reason to use 4WD in just rain. However. DO yes I said DO put it in 4WD from time to time in order to keep everything up front all lubed up and ready. I mean like every 7500-10,000 miles or so. Lock it in an go for a slow ride (in grass , mud, or sand if possible) or at least a nice slow ride in a open parking lot. You only need to go a few hundred feet. Then go back to 2WD high.
Good point. That's not an issue for me as my truck is in 4x4 enough when I actually need it that it gets plenty of exercise. The OP may indeed need to exercise his from time to time.
RE: 4wd characteristics
Don't use 4wd on merely wet pavement from rain. That will cause it to bind for sure. Ok to use in sand, mud, snow, ice, gravel and loose dirt, but not wet pavement or hard pack dirt. Too much traction on wet pavement or hard pack dirt.
I second the above advice. Wet pavement from rain is not slick enough to allow your tires to break loose and prevent binding.
Save your 4 wheel drive button for snow, ice, gravel (if absolutely necessary), loose dirt, and mud/wet grass etc.
RE: Who will sell more in 2009? Chrysler or Toyota?
I would say Toyota unless Chrysler gets better news as a profitible corporation. A lot a farmers, and oil field workers in our area are switiching from the big 3 to Toyota.
I guess those guys are switching to Tacomas? Tundra sales are much less than the Dodge/Ram. The only reason Toyota is close to Dodge/Ram in over all truck sales is because the Tacoma is a good seller and the Dakota is not. Comparing Ram versus Tundra, the sales numbers aren't even close.
Having said all that, I'm not sure how it will come out. Last year Toyota sold more "trucks" (Tacomas, Tundras, etc.). Dodge/Ram had a lead going into December this year, but many dealers are still waiting on 2010 HD Rams. That, without a doubt, hurt Ram sales in December. Lots of potential Ram buyers waiting on that new HD Ram.
RE: Failed Inspection
Some of you oil cops need to move to Kalifornia; you'd fit right in. :R
Some of you with bed plates better watch out, the oil cops are here.
:B
RE: New Ram not recommended for slide in?
It's no secret that trying to talk to Dodge truck owners is extremely hard and starts forum wars as many tend to act more like a cult with closed minds. Again, I'm not bashing but rather attempting to answer the OP's thread question with the known and 'documented' facts....
...Notice, the forum cracking issues basically were always on Dodge Rams not Ford's or GM's.
Having already been potentially profiled a Ram owning closed minded cult member, I hope you'll bare with me a bit and entertain a few reasoned follow-ups to your affirmed conclusions.
1) Unfortunately, your lenghty explination does nothing to explain why of Rams built to the apparent identical build configuration, frame, wheelbase, cab-config, bed box and year of manufacture, some will bare the advisory label yet others will not. In fact, some of the apparent identical build even provide instructions on how to load a slide-in camper!!...How do I know this?? Because I have seen this for myself. I have inspected and crawled underneath these same & like trucks at length (at my local DC dealer) with a tape measure to try and determine a difference...
2) You state that this problem "has existed for a decade or more", yet of all the previous threads (via a search, and as I recall at that time) relating to a frame issue, these post pointed to only the 3d generation Ram with the new boxed hydroformed frame, shortly after they were introduced in 2003. As with any new concept (e.g. frame), it was accompanied with a bit of consumer trepidation. However, of these many varied post, none offered any 'documented' or 'factual' (to borrow your strident terms) information and/or photographs about the alledged frame flex problem.
3) You infer that this issue is limited to Dodge alone implying that this alledged frame flex (meaning, still yet to be evidenced) does not occur with Ford or GM. This may or may not be true, but on it's face seems somewhat dubious to me.
I've worked for many a year around military and civilian cargo aircraft, the "Heavy Lifters" carring similar and far greater weight (10k lbs per 88" x 108" pallet and far heavier munitions, rolling stock, et. al.) & high C/G loads, distribuited somewhat randomly (based on proper weight & balance) upon their cargo floors. I can assure you that these aircraft built mostly of aluminum (a far less nobel material than the steel found in a Ford or GM frame) will flex 'extensively' under the extreme forces and weight of these loads.
3 tons, from the show-me state.
A very good rebuttal 3 tons.
I admire Travelnutz trying to keep the peace, but I do find what he is saying potentially dubious as well.
I have yet to read of any frame related failure on a Dodge/Ram truck from any camper stresses. There were some frame issues in Cummins Dodges, about 20 years ago I believe.
I may be wrong, but lets just ask the drivers of Dodge/Ram trucks here in the TC forum. Any of you guys ever hear about any of this info posted by Travelnutz or have you even heard or seen anything like this firsthand? I personally have not.
I am quite sure, if one wants to carry a slide in TC in a Dodge/Ram pickup, all one has to do is check a box marked "Camper Package" or something similar when he/she orders it new. If buying one sitting on the lot, it might be hard to find one outfitted with the camper package, unless you have a good dealer.
Now then, I return the gesture asking Travelnutz to "relax" as well. Just as Dodge cult followers will defend their brand ferociously, You sir, have a history of defending your opinions just as ferociously and you usually don't or won't take the time to confirm your statements with any resources to back it up. It makes it hard to take you at your word, when your words don't seem to coincide with the actual experiences of truck owners and folks like 3 tons above who have gone to great lengths to determine what the difference is between a Dodge truck that is recommended and one that isn't. What you say may be true, but I need to see some proof if it's not too much trouble.
So I ask again, Dodge/Ram TC folks out there, please respond with your experiences. Thanks.
RE: GM 6.5 Diesel
Check out this link for lots of info.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit_Diesel_V8_engine
According to the article, the power figures were
"Power / Torque (lowest): 180 hp (134 kW) @ 3,400 rpm / 360 lb·ft (488 N·m) @ 1,700 rpm
Power / Torque (highest): 215 hp (160 kW) @ 3,200 rpm / 440 lb·ft (597 N·m) @ 1,800 rpm"
I would assume a 99 would be at or near the "highest" rating.
