Gas vs Diesel

[Justus C]

Originally Posted by floyd

This is cut and paste from the Chevrolet build and price site...
No options which are not required, this apparently the minimum list price to get a diesel Colorado...

Standard Vehicle Price$41,400
Selected Colors
$0
Selected Options (9)
$3,500
Total Vehicle and Options$44,900
Destination Freight Charge$1,095
Total Vehicle Price$45,995

Total Cash Allowance[s]-$1,250
Net Price$44,745
Total Included Price Discounts and Cash Allowances:-$1,250

† MSRP less cash offers. Tax, title, license and dealer fees extra. Take new retail delivery by 01/02/2020. Residency restrictions apply. Not available with some other offers. See dealer for details.


This plus the tow package should be everything required to get Diesel Colorado and a 7700 pound tow rating.


Apparently there is no diesel 2WD.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Here is the price from the Ranger build and price site...
The base price on the Ranger is $24,400 plus $495 for a factory tow package.


This everything required to get a 4CYL Ranger and a tow rating of 7500 pounds.

Notice I did not say "comparably equipped" since each truck above has only the equipment required to get the mentioned engine with the "comparable" tow rating.

What do I get for beating your best price?

I've attached a build and price invoice for your review. This is a 4x2 Duramax Colorado LT Crew Cab short bed coming in at $36,460 (includes $1,250 incentives). An extended bed is available for about $400 more. Although the "Mechanical" section lists the 2.5L gas engine, please note, split between pages 1 and 2, the Duramax option. The Z82 trailering package is also included (by default) for $250.

The revised comparison puts the Colorado at about roughly one and a half times the cost of the Ranger. Which does round up to twice the cost...

I compared 4x4 to 4x4 initially because I would never buy a 4x2 truck. Neither would most Americans, as the vast majority of light trucks sold are 4x4. So for most members, I would wager that comparison is more relevant.

I don't buy new. As I said, I have a short list and I'm keeping an open mind. But I suspect in two or three years I'll be plunking down money on a greatly depreciated Ranger, because it will still be much more economical than a greatly depreciated Colorado Duramax. Just not quite twice as economical.

[ThomasC]

Originally Posted by floyd

No, actually I bought an STX which has XLT upholstery.
The base interior in my opinion is better than the Lariat (purely subjective).
Go check it out.

At any rate..your remark is tangent and irrelevant to the point.



The main difference here really is the requirement to buy 4WD on the Colorado...That would be a deal breaker for me.


I'm pretty sure you could comprehend the point of my post , if you made the effort.

I thought I was the only two wheel drive owner left in existence. Way to go. I am a newbe to the forum and I quickly noticed that Glen can have an unfortunate way with words. He is actually a true and proper internet Troll.

[Glenn Baglo]

Originally Posted by ThomasC

I thought I was the only two wheel drive owner left in existence. Way to go. I am a newbe to the forum and I quickly noticed that Glen can have an unfortunate way with words. He is actually a true and proper internet Troll.

You need to have been here for a while, observing. Floyd is nothing if not loyal and consistent in his adoration of the Ford Ranger and Scamp. He needs a poke every once in a while.
My observation, BTW, is from getting a ride in a friend's week-old Ranger and noting the scuffed vinyl/cardboard passenger door panel.

You can't compare vehicles without taking all into account. That is my point.

[floyd]

Originally Posted by Justus C

What do I get for beating your best price?

I've attached a build and price invoice for your review. This is a 4x2 Duramax Colorado LT Crew Cab short bed coming in at $36,460 (includes $1,250 incentives). An extended bed is available for about $400 more. Although the "Mechanical" section lists the 2.5L gas engine, please note, split between pages 1 and 2, the Duramax option. The Z82 trailering package is also included (by default) for $250.

The revised comparison puts the Colorado at about roughly one and a half times the cost of the Ranger. Which does round up to twice the cost...

I compared 4x4 to 4x4 initially because I would never buy a 4x2 truck. Neither would most Americans, as the vast majority of light trucks sold are 4x4. So for most members, I would wager that comparison is more relevant.

I don't buy new. As I said, I have a short list and I'm keeping an open mind. But I suspect in two or three years I'll be plunking down money on a greatly depreciated Ranger, because it will still be much more economical than a greatly depreciated Colorado Duramax. Just not quite twice as economical.

The GM price and build sheet that I looked at showed that the Diesel could only be bought with 4WD.
Assuming you are correct... I would then gladly retract the "roughly twice"...
So, OK... it would be only roughly 1.5 times the price.
Goes well with the diesel taking about 1.5 times as long to reach 60MPH.

The Diesel , unladen, can barely break 11 seconds 0-60... just a little slower than my 1978 Fairmont 4dr 88HP 4CYL.


Not sure where you got the "Vast Majority" thing, but, anecdotally it does appear to be so, although I doubt it.
I am glad that a 2WD version of the Ranger was available or I would not own one... in fact I would gladly pay a couple thousand dollars OVER the price of a 4WD to get an honest 2WD Ranger(I drive on pavement)...Remember the Lightning?

Well maybe a properly done AWD... Remember the Syclone?



My greatly depreciated Ranger 2WD brought a third of its original purchase price after 18 years, I was satisfied.

[JonRaw]

Originally Posted by floyd

The GM price and build sheet that I looked at showed that the Diesel could only be bought with 4WD.
Assuming you are correct... I would then gladly retract the "roughly twice"...
So, OK... it would be only roughly 1.5 times the price.
Goes well with the diesel taking about 1.5 times as long to reach 60MPH.

The Diesel , unladen, can barely break 11 seconds 0-60... just a little slower than my 1978 Fairmont 4dr 88HP 4CYL.


Not sure where you got the "Vast Majority" thing, but, anecdotally it does appear to be so, although I doubt it.
I am glad that a 2WD version of the Ranger was available or I would not own one... in fact I would gladly pay a couple thousand dollars OVER the price of a 4WD to get an honest 2WD Ranger(I drive on pavement)...Remember the Lightning?

Well maybe a properly done AWD... Remember the Syclone?



My greatly depreciated Ranger 2WD brought a third of its original purchase price after 18 years, I was satisfied.

2019 2WD Duramax Colorado. Same truck is still available in a 2020 model. Screen shot attached, Taken right from the Chevy website.



If I were worried about 0-60 times I would have gotten a Tesla. While I totally agree the Ranger would 'blow the doors off' the Colorado at a stop light, and you would be able to make it to the next stop light way before I would. I am guessing towing my 5300lb Bigfoot from San Jose to say Quartzite up and down the Grapevine (I-5 in California North of LA) I'd have a heck of a better drive. I might even get there before you depending on how many times we each had to fill up. The Ranger has an 18 gallon gas tank from what I read. The Colorado has a 21 gallon gas tank and since diesel doesn't need room for evaporator, it holds over 23 gallons of diesel fuel.

[floyd]

Originally Posted by JonRaw

2019 2WD Duramax Colorado. Same truck is still available in a 2020 model. Screen shot attached, Taken right from the Chevy website.



If I were worried about 0-60 times I would have gotten a Tesla. While I totally agree the Ranger would 'blow the doors off' the Colorado at a stop light, and you would be able to make it to the next stop light way before I would. I am guessing towing my 5300lb Bigfoot from San Jose to say Quartzite up and down the Grapevine (I-5 in California North of LA) I'd have a heck of a better drive. I might even get there before you depending on how many times we each had to fill up. The Ranger has an 18 gallon gas tank from what I read. The Colorado has a 21 gallon gas tank and since diesel doesn't need room for evaporator, it holds over 23 gallons of diesel fuel.

Right.... You're guessing!
But as you point out, the real differences are practically negligible with the advantages coming down to preferences.
I was thinking more like the "on ramp" than the stop light, but you're right either way.
I just took a trip yesterday on state highways (non-Interstate) at the speed limit. 28.5 MPG for the trip.

[Rzrbrn]

But when you add 4x4 the tow and payload rating dwindle considerably on both the Colorado and the Ranger, right?

[salmo7000]

Not that I'm extremely interested in continuing the Colorado diesel vs. Ford Ranger price debate, but one other important thing to consider is payload. There is huge variability in payload, not only among the different models but even among individual trucks of the same model. One definitely needs to not only look at the range the manufacturer advertises but also on the exact truck they are planning to purchase. A really generous payload listed on a manufacturer's website declines quickly based on the options on each particular vehicle.

My Colorado's payload is right at 1,390 lbs, which is adequate to handle the tongue weight of my Escape 19, a 250-lb Leer topper, 2 people, 2 45-lb dogs, a 70-lb fishing pontoon that rides on the topper, and some light gear in the back of the truck. I don't know what the payload is for a comparably equipped Ford Ranger, but for the F150 2.7L Ecoboost, it was slightly but not greatly more than the Colorado I bought. The higher the trim (e.g. Lariat, Platinum, King Ranch), the lower the payload. With the F150's, Ford also has payload package options that increase it quite a lot, but when I was looking it seemed difficult to find one so equipped already sitting on a lot. The dealers I talked to said I would need to special order it.

Again, I have no idea the payload situation with the Ranger and if Ford has an option to increase it, but it's another variable to consider when buying a pickup, particularly a mid-size half-ton. Even with a relatively light trailer at just over half the weight my truck is rated to tow, I was surprised at how fast payload adds up. So it's important to know that number when comparing models, costs, and the tradeoffs of each.

[salmo7000]

Originally Posted by Rzrbrn

But when you add 4x4 the tow and payload rating dwindle considerably on both the Colorado and the Ranger, right?

Oops, I guess I've fallen behind in the debate! Yes 4X4, crew versus club cab versus neither, and a diesel engine versus gas all reduce payload. But the only way to know by how much is to look at the sticker on the exact vehicles you're comparing, which is located on the driver's side door. It will say something like "Combined weight of cargo and passengers should never exceed X,XXX lbs".

[Glenn Baglo]

When parts fall off, payload increases.

[ThomasC]

Originally Posted by salmo7000

Not that I'm extremely interested in continuing the Colorado diesel vs. Ford Ranger price debate, but one other important thing to consider is payload. There is huge variability in payload, not only among the different models but even among individual trucks of the same model. One definitely needs to not only look at the range the manufacturer advertises but also on the exact truck they are planning to purchase. A really generous payload listed on a manufacturer's website declines quickly based on the options on each particular vehicle.

My Colorado's payload is right at 1,390 lbs, which is adequate to handle the tongue weight of my Escape 19, a 250-lb Leer topper, 2 people, 2 45-lb dogs, a 70-lb fishing pontoon that rides on the topper, and some light gear in the back of the truck. I don't know what the payload is for a comparably equipped Ford Ranger, but for the F150 2.7L Ecoboost, it was slightly but not greatly more than the Colorado I bought. The higher the trim (e.g. Lariat, Platinum, King Ranch), the lower the payload. With the F150's, Ford also has payload package options that increase it quite a lot, but when I was looking it seemed difficult to find one so equipped already sitting on a lot. The dealers I talked to said I would need to special order it.

Again, I have no idea the payload situation with the Ranger and if Ford has an option to increase it, but it's another variable to consider when buying a pickup, particularly a mid-size half-ton. Even with a relatively light trailer at just over half the weight my truck is rated to tow, I was surprised at how fast payload adds up. So it's important to know that number when comparing models, costs, and the tradeoffs of each.

You are right I was doing searches across the country and I could not find what I wanted in a F-150 so I ordered it. XLT regular cab, 2wd, 8 foot bed, max haul, max tow, plus some Knick knacks. The dealer I went to priced it like it was a car on his lot. I had a 2016 F-150 that was almost the same truck. It had a 3.5 naturally aspirated V-6 and a six speed with a tow package. I also had a 2017 turbo Civic. I basically swapped both vehicles for the new truck. I felt I got a good deal.

It would tow my Styrofoam box ok but a bigfoot would have killed it. It had a 6000# tow capacity. If you opt for the Max haul you will get the 3.5 eco-boost, larger tires and a stiffer ride. The bed capacity is 3049# and the tow capacity is 13,000#. It also has that 10 speed transmission which in my estimation makes the truck about perfect. Oh yeah 32 gallon tank.

[floyd]

Originally Posted by Rzrbrn

But when you add 4x4 the tow and payload rating dwindle considerably on both the Colorado and the Ranger, right?

Tow rating and tongue weight are the same on every version of the Ranger with a tow package, including 4X4 and SuperCrew....7500 and 750 respectively.

The payload varies, My 2WD SuperCab has an 1860 pound payload. Payload decreases as you move up to the SuperCrew and the 4X4.

I think the 2WD SuperCab may be underestimated since it is about 500 pounds lighter than the a 4X4 SuperCrew.

They likely just tested them all to the same J2807 standard, leaving a solid margin on the SuperCab 2WD


Towing Capacity on the Colorado
(w/tow package)
The base Colorado with the four-cylinder offers a towing capacity of 3500 pounds. The V-6 Colorado can tow 7000 pounds, while the diesel-powered version can tow 7700.

[Justus C]

Originally Posted by Rzrbrn

But when you add 4x4 the tow and payload rating dwindle considerably on both the Colorado and the Ranger, right?

Kind of...There's a minimal impact to tow rating on the Colorado/Canyon but payload takes a noticeable hit on the Ranger--yet it is still higher than the highest-rated Colorado 4x2. Keep in mind these are advertised maximums before any fancy fixin's are added to the truck. (Table edited after posting.)

     Model	       Engine	  Drive Type	Max Towing	Max Payload
Ranger SuperCab	    2.3L EcoBoost    4x2	  7,500		   1,860
Ranger SuperCab	    2.3L EcoBoost    4x4	  7,500		   1,650
Colorado Crew Cab   2.8L Duramax     4x2	  7,700		   1,494
Colorado Crew Cab   2.8L Duramax     4x4	  7,600		   1,473
Colorado Crew Cab   3.6L V6	     4x2	  7,000		   1,578
Coloardo Crew Cab   3.6L V6	     4x4	  7,000		   1,551

Chevy/GMC are stingy with their data in their brochures and trailering guide. They only list max payload for a given engine with the short box, 2wd configuration. Using the Comparison tool on Chevy's website gives the payload numbers listed above.

[floyd]

Originally Posted by Justus C

Kind of...There's a minimal impact to tow rating on the Colorado/Canyon but payload takes a noticeable hit on the Ranger--yet it is still higher than the highest-rated Colorado 4x2. Keep in mind these are advertised maximums before any fancy fixin's are added to the truck. (Table edited after posting.)

     Model           Engine      Drive Type    Max Towing    Max Payload
Ranger SuperCab        2.3L EcoBoost    4x2      7,500           1,860
Ranger SuperCab        2.3L EcoBoost    4x4      7,500           1,650
Colorado Crew Cab   2.8L Duramax     4x2      7,700           1,494
Colorado Crew Cab   2.8L Duramax     4x4      7,600           1,473
Colorado Crew Cab   3.6L V6         4x2      7,000           1,578
 Coloardo Crew Cab   3.6L V6         4x4      7,000           1,551

Chevy/GMC are stingy with their data in their brochures and trailering guide. They only list max payload for a given engine with the short box, 2wd configuration. Using the Comparison tool on Chevy's website gives the payload numbers listed above.

Minimal impact on tow ratings???
Let's skip the 3500 pound tow ratings on entry level truck both 2.5L 4CYL. and 3.6L


7000 pounds rating..........................(3.6L).
7700,7600 and 7550 pound ratings...( Duramax Diesel)
5000 pound rating.,........................ (ZR2 both diesel and 3.6L),

An important bit more than a minimal impact across the Colorado line-up.

https://www.chevrolet.com/content/da...ring-chart.pdf

[Justus C]

Originally Posted by floyd

Minimal impact on tow ratings???
Let's skip the 3500 pound tow ratings on entry level truck both 2.5L 4CYL. and 3.6L


7000 pounds rating..........................(3.6L).
7700,7600 and 7550 pound ratings...( Duramax Diesel)
5000 pound rating.,........................ (ZR2 both diesel and 3.6L),

An important bit more than a minimal impact across the Colorado line-up.

https://www.chevrolet.com/content/da...ring-chart.pdf

Lay off the eggnog Floyd. My post was a response to a question about the difference between 4x4 and 4x2 on payload and towing when the only difference is drive type. Not what the base model can tow compared to a Duramax. Not what the various trims and packages can tow. A no kidding comparison of the same model, trim, and package with and without four wheel drive.

And that comparison, which is pretty clear from the post, is pretty minimal. I hope you can get the giant stick out of your butt before Christmas.

[floyd]

Originally Posted by Justus C

Lay off the eggnog Floyd. My post was a response to a question about the difference between 4x4 and 4x2 on payload and towing when the only difference is drive type. Not what the base model can tow compared to a Duramax. Not what the various trims and packages can tow. A no kidding comparison of the same model, trim, and package with and without four wheel drive.

And that comparison, which is pretty clear from the post, is pretty minimal. I hope you can get the giant stick out of your butt before Christmas.

Nice Banter! Are you sure you're even old enough to drive?
,I'm guessing I missed your point huh?


Hey, nice trailer, please do a thread on it with pictures sometime, there's a lot of folks here who have never seen one!


Merry Christmas anyway...
No offense was intended
Love ya!

BTW: its not me who's been drinking, as everybody here but you already knows...I'm a teetotaler... Cheers!

[Rzrbrn]

Thanks Justus

[John in Santa Cruz]

Originally Posted by War Eagle

A few personal observations regarding diesel engines in light duty trucks: 1) Don't forget resale value. In 1999, I paid an extra $4,500 to get the 7.3L PowerStroke in my then new F-250 SuperDuty. Twenty years later, I got every bit of that back when I finally sold it. 2) Regarding maintenance, I swallowed hard every time I had to buy the 15 quarts of diesel engine oil (yes, nearly 4 gallons of oil!) for every oil change in that 7.3L. But 3), it barely broke a sweat towing 65 mph at around 2,000 engine RPM getting +/- 20 MPG. I love my current 2016 F-150 5.0L V8 gas-burner, but it's no 7.3L PowerStroke.

yeah. about 2 years ago we bought a 2002 F250 extracab longbed 4x4 7.3 for $13000... have put about 20,000 miles on it so far. totally happy with it for road trips and anything involving hauling. getting 13-15 MPG hauling the escape 21 around with a lot of junk in the truck, and 16-19 driving just the truck on long hauls. don't drive it locally enough to know what sort of MPG it gets in town, and don't care. yeah, those 4 gallon oil changes, heh. Costco's 3-gallon packs of Delo400 do it for me as 15W40 is the right weight for my 1993 mercedes 300CE too.

[bigangelman]

Originally Posted by ThomasC

I know this has been rehashed many times but there is one angle no one seems to mention. I just got a new F-150 eco-boost and it has twice the load and towing capacity that I will need for my Bigfoot 25TB that I should have in the next few months.

Back to the real world. I towed my Styrofoam box to Florida a couple of weeks ago. I could get about 10 mpg with the cruise set to 65. Assuming I could get 50% more with a diesel that would be 15mpg.

Gas at $2.30 per gallon works out to 23 cents per mile. Diesel at $2.75 per gallon is a little more than 18 cents per mile.

A Ford F-150 is not available with a Diesel in 2019. So move up to an F-250 which is more money and then the diesel engine option is more than $10,000 more. So if the difference between gas and diesel is about 5 cents per mile then $10,000 divided by .05 = 200,000 miles. Even if I double the efficiency of the diesel to 20 mpg I would still have to drive 100,000 miles to break even.

So why diesel.

It's Eco or Boost you can't have both. But you would probably be better off with a V8, if majority of driving is towing.

[Joe Romas]

Originally Posted by ThomasC

I thought I was the only two wheel drive owner left in existence. Way to go. I am a newbe to the forum and I quickly noticed that Glen can have an unfortunate way with words. He is actually a true and proper internet Troll.

Count me as a 2WD truck owner too. On my last one I had 3 good sized repairs and they were all four 4WD stuf that's not on a 2WD. Actual numbers are 84% of new trucks are 4WD. Besides the added weight of 4WD cuts down on payload and your hauling that extra weight all the time.

Re diesels. I owned a 1999 Jetta TDI that AVERAGED for over 114,000 miles of 49.6 MPG with NO repairs, just regular maintenance. Top that with a Prius

As I and my 2006 Jeep CRD Liberty (diesel) have aged, in October I found and bought a buy back 2014 Jetta Sportwagen from a southern state with 13k miles. Fantastic car and when you wipe the inside of the tail pipe your finger comes out clean and there is NO exhaust smell at all and no diesel sound.

GM is releasing diesel engines in both their 1500 trucks and Suburbans for 2020.
https://media.chevrolet.com/media/us...silverado.html

There seems to be a lot of people here stuck in the 1970's and have no idea of what modern diesel engines are like in cars and light trucks.

Mark my word, at one point in time the "scientists", with mail order degrees at carb and others are going to start looking at gasoline powered vehicle emissions. If you don't want to read the following link here's jist of the lead scientist at CARB.


Mr. Tran’s Ph.D. was not awarded by the University of California at Davis as Tran claimed. Mr. Tran subsequently admitted that he purchased his Ph.D. at a cost of $1,000 from ‘Thornhill University,’ a fake institution and Internet diploma mill based at a UPS store in New York.”


https://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/06/...ation-scandal/