Would you buy a 6.0L that has not been bullet-proofed?

Honestly, as someone already mentioned, look for a used Diesel truck in oil producing or cattle driven states. The prices of diesel trucks is staggeringly low compared to either coast or here in the Midwest.

I have a friend in Oklahoma that tells me all the time about the cheaper trucks he finds out there and he's a Rancher and Hot Shotter, so he's always keeping an eye out.

That being said, IMO a non-bulletproofed 6.0L over 100k is like walking around with a grenade that you pulled and lost the pin to and haven't let go of the clip yet.

Yeah there are people who never had a single issue, but I wouldn't take that chance especially if your truck is a money maker.

JohnRW1621 wrote: Would the seller take $13k leaving you $5k to bullet proof?

That will probably be my offer, if I make one.

The King Ranch trim package is much more than I actually want. Don't like driving something that feels ostentatious.

The previously mentioned Silverado LT is more my style, but I can't afford one yet. (Not looking to finance)

I'll sell you my bulletproofed 03.5 CC LWB 4x4 for 1/2 that.

3x the miles though.

Man, that's quite a list to make it a reliable engine. I'm amazed the non-bulletproof trucks are worth as much as they are!

As for the BMW - I don't know about the garden variety ones, but the M5 is a black diamond car to work on. I believe the spark plugs are at the geometric center of the car, and something as simple as a thermostat involves a surprising amount of disassembly. Then there's the rear struts, which are common to all E39s. You basically have to strip out the entire rear half of the interior.

In reply to Keith Tanner:

Yep. That's why 7.3's are twice the cost of comparable 6.0's

I thought that vintage Ford was pretty much designed for maintenance to be done with the cab off the frame? On my '03 it was super easy to pull the cab with either a lift or gantry.

SVreX wrote: (Not looking to finance)

I wasn't going to either but 1.99‰ on a used car for 3 years changed my mind.

I personally wouldn't. The kind of things that go wrong with them are not as frequent as most people say, but when they do go wrong its a big deal. Like take the cab off the frame big deal, tear down most of the top end, and fix it hoping that you caught it before a crankcase full of milkshake kind of thing. Then the bulletproof parts to fix them are quite literally about 10x cost what they should be.

Most 6.0L owners have them because they are die-hard fans of the 6.0L. Unless you're a real fan and willing to put up with the potential cost, I would look to other diesels. I would actually prefer an early Dmax knowing I would have to do injectors before I would have a 6.0L.

I agree with finding a clean 7.3L, but those trucks usually come in one of two flavors: Either beaten into a pulp over 400k miles, or nice and babied but asking 3 times what its worth. Its rare to find one in a condition you would like that doesn't cost as much as a more modern truck.

oldopelguy wrote: I thought that vintage Ford was pretty much designed for maintenance to be done with the cab off the frame? On my '03 it was super easy to pull the cab with either a lift or gantry.

Maintenance is dirt simple with a screwdriver and a rag. Its the repairs that require pulling the cab.

curtis73 wrote: I agree with finding a clean 7.3L, but those trucks usually come in one of two flavors: Either beaten into a pulp over 400k miles, or nice and babied but asking 3 times what its worth. Its rare to find one in a condition you would like that doesn't cost as much as a more modern truck.

The vans got the 7.3 and they have no resale value. Just sayin'.

I'd go to Texas and pay for a OBS F350 up to '97. They have 'em in ridiculously good condition. Parts are plentiful too.

In reply to ebonyandivory:

I'm not buying a '97. Too old.

At least with the '99's and up, the body style is new enough that a clean one looks like a modern vehicle.

I personally prefer the look of the square cab trucks, but customers measure my business by appearance, and don't want to work with someone who's a cheap ass driving a crappy old truck. I can't change the fact that people do judge a book by it's cover.

The 1st gen powerstrokes don't have the power of the 99.5 and later trucks. Even on the 7.3 Ford was constantly changing things. Every year is a little different. My preference is 2003. Wierd part is every generation diesel seems to have its issues outside of the 7.3. I wouldn't do GM. That engine is higher maintenance and much more expensive than their gas engines. Love the trans but that diesel sucks.

In reply to curtis73:

A clean 7.3 can get sick money. Apples to apples, they are about 7 to 10k more than an identical 6.0. And worth the difference. They are increasing in value.

In reply to markwemple:

I'm not sure I can agree with you about the blanket statement nixing GM diesels.

I don't know any owners of Duramaxes who are unhappy.

In reply to SVreX:

Duramaxes seem to be real anvils, as much as I don't like GM. The only thing really bad about them is the bodies fall apart. They're not as bad as Dodges or Fords in this regard, but it still sucks.

Also IMO, they're easier to work on than Fords.

Keith Tanner wrote: Man, that's quite a list to make it a reliable engine. I'm amazed the non-bulletproof trucks are worth as much as they are! As for the BMW - I don't know about the garden variety ones, but the M5 is a black diamond car to work on. I believe the spark plugs are at the geometric center of the car, and something as simple as a thermostat involves a surprising amount of disassembly. Then there's the rear struts, which are common to all E39s. You basically have to strip out the entire rear half of the interior.

I'd agree, I'm halfway through replacing the coolant pipes on a e46 330i. While in there I'm doing the ccv lines, ccv itself, broke the brake booster "suck jet pump", oil filter housing gasket, vanos oil line, and I noticed once I had everything out that the power steering hoses are starting to weep and the fluid is grey not red like it should be... Having to take the intake manifold off to get to the starter is beyond ridiculous. Also having the entire engine wiring attached to the intake manifold, oxygen sensor wires are tucked into the intake manifold (why???)... (the car has 210k miles, po did most of the major "do this before it implodes work but was unaware of the hard coolant lines). I also broke the (luckily separate) part of the intake manifold that the ccv lines attach to. I'm going to jb weld it back in and hope that holds...

The truck was designed for fleet work, i.e. people that have lifts readily available. Apparently everything is much much easier to get to once you take the cab off of the truck. Last time I looked into it, you took out 4 to 6 bolts, lifted the cab (after disconnecting the wiring plugs) and everything was accessible.

SVreX wrote: In reply to markwemple: I'm not sure I can agree with you about the blanket statement nixing GM diesels. I don't know any owners of Duramaxes who are unhappy.

Have you seen maintenance or common replaceables? Price injectors for example. Other than people who own new ones, everyone I know when back to gas.

Mad_Ratel wrote: Having to take the intake manifold off to get to the starter is beyond ridiculous.

You have to do that on a Toyota 4.7, too. The starter is in the vee of the block.

A filter on the cooling system to catch the casting sand. That one still has me shaking my head...

markwemple wrote:

SVreX wrote: In reply to markwemple: I'm not sure I can agree with you about the blanket statement nixing GM diesels. I don't know any owners of Duramaxes who are unhappy.

Have you seen maintenance or common replaceables? Price injectors for example. Other than people who own new ones, everyone I know when back to gas.

How is that different than Ford? Injectors on a diesel are ridiculously expensive. IIRC, mine cost something like $2700 for a PSD. However, I most certainly would not include them in a list of "maintenance or common replaceables". I've put 300K on a set of injectors, with no sign of needing to do them again.

If you are suggesting I'd be better with gas, well, I've been driving a diesel for a long time and don't think I want to go back to gas. Diesel fits my lifestyle and usage better (though I recognize it wouldn't work for some people).

I live in an agricultural region. Diesels are very common- and no one I know is trading them in for gas burners.

Keith Tanner wrote:

Mad_Ratel wrote: Having to take the intake manifold off to get to the starter is beyond ridiculous.

You have to do that on a Toyota 4.7, too. The starter is in the vee of the block. A filter on the cooling system to catch the casting sand. That one still has me shaking my head...

At least the intake manifold is removable. I can think of some vehicles where accessing the starter requires first removing the drivetrain.

Allegedly you CAN do a Duramax starter in-chassis, but I couldn't see how that is possible with the core support and transmission in place.

I'm not suggesting you go with gas. Heck I drive diesel and only five my truck maybe 40xs per year. Stupid I know but when I use it, I'm using it.

SVreX wrote:

markwemple wrote:

SVreX wrote: In reply to markwemple: I'm not sure I can agree with you about the blanket statement nixing GM diesels. I don't know any owners of Duramaxes who are unhappy.

Have you seen maintenance or common replaceables? Price injectors for example. Other than people who own new ones, everyone I know when back to gas.

How is that different than Ford? Injectors on a diesel are ridiculously expensive. IIRC, mine cost something like $2700 for a PSD. However, I most certainly would not include them in a list of "maintenance or common replaceables". I've put 300K on a set of injectors, with no sign of needing to do them again. If you are suggesting I'd be better with gas, well, I've been driving a diesel for a long time and don't think I want to go back to gas. Diesel fits my lifestyle and usage better (though I recognize it wouldn't work for some people). I live in an agricultural region. Diesels are very common- and no one I know is trading them in for gas burners.

I don't understand why injectors are always the point of controversy with Diesel engines. No matter what truck it is, they are expensive. Some may cost more than others, but they all cost $300+ not counting the core.

In all honesty, anything Diesel related is expensive.

I agree with SVreX, I don't agree with the above statements about the Duramax. I just hit 300k on my '08 Duramax LMM and it's still running strong. I've put 73k on it since I bought it and I put a water pump on it at 275k and replaced the hose between the fuel filter housing and High Pressure Fuel pump. Probably will have to do ball joints on the trucks sometime soon, because that's one of the most common failures on the GM trucks.

markwemple wrote:

SVreX wrote: In reply to markwemple: I'm not sure I can agree with you about the blanket statement nixing GM diesels. I don't know any owners of Duramaxes who are unhappy.

Have you seen maintenance or common replaceables? Price injectors for example. Other than people who own new ones, everyone I know when back to gas.

I have an 04 Dmax that I loved so much I bought another 08. Replaceables are the same cost as anything else.

And I'll take $1300 injectors and a lifted hood over a milkshake in the crankcase and a $5000 oil cooler or EGR cooler repair with a removed cab any day.

I'm surprised amongst all this there's been no mention of Dodge / Cummins.