Markcuda
Veteran Member
Exactly
RAM 3500 now 800lb.ft and 30,000lb GVWR!
- Thread starter Dmace
- Start date
- Views: 22463
OP
Dmace
Elite Member
I still think it's too early to say UREA injection is a good substitute. With all the problems with freezing fluid, clogged injectors and rising cost of DEF I would rather have the NOx Absorber Catalyst (NAC) system. No EGR problems yet on our diesel fleet trucks and all have over 100k and idle most of the day. Although, we don't have any DEF trucks to compare to either. The SMALL fuel mileage increase with the DEF hardly makes up for the cost of the DEF or the time spent re-filling the tank or the time lost de-frosting the tank.
Another great thing about the updated truck, you can still get a 6-speed manual transmission and mega cab. :thumbsup:
Egon
Epic Contributor
unlike the Ford torqueshift which is already showing mass problems/QUOTE]
What!, a Ford with Transmission problems??, can't be.
Todd_C
Gold Member
Just when Sam Elliott started doing commercials, I sold my 07 Dodge 5.9. I am now suffering from Cummins withdrawl. I like my new Tundra but it just isn't the same. I'm still waiting to see if Ram changes to Urea. There are still people having trouble with the emission crap on the 6.7. I don't know how long I can hold out.
Lt CHEG
Platinum Member
From what I've seen around here, as well as from what is reported on in the many forums, I don't think I'd call the fuel mileage increases from the 2011 vs. 2010 Ford and GM trucks "small." The local fuel oil supplier, who has both GM and Ford Diesel trucks by the way, told me that he is getting between 20 to 25 percent increases in fuel economy on his 2011 vs. 2009 diesel trucks.
That would more than account for the cost of DEF, even if prices for DEF doubled. It also has resulted in fewer regenerations for the DPF's which can only be a good thing resulting in less oil dilution along with other benefits. Personally I wouldn't consider any new diesel that didn't utilize SCR (urea injection) for my next vehicle, which admittedly will be several years away. I'm sure Ram will include SCR in their vehicles for 2013 as they will have no choice but to do so to meet EPA mandates, so I'm sure that wouldn't hinder me from considering a Ram when I am next in the market. The kicker will be the transmission. If they go with the Aisin transmission then it could be a real contender, as 4500 and 5500 owners seem very happy with that transmission. Who knows, I own a NH tractor, marketed by Fiat so maybe some day I'll own a Ram, made by Fiat. I've said it several times before that the Ram's are the best looking trucks on the market hands down, and the Cummins is clearly a winner. Now as long as they get Aisin or some other company to build their transmissions they may be the truck to beat. I guess only time will tell, but this is certainly promising news.
hawkeye08
Elite Member
I would like to see the Dodge in the test pickuptrucks.com did in the Rockies last year between Ford and Chev.
OP
Dmace
Elite Member
I have a hard time believing a 20-25% increase in fuel mileage. Just look at the last Heavy Duty Shootout and you will see the RAM was within 10-15% of the GM/Ford fuel mileage and the GM used almost half a gallon of DEF fluid. With the more powerful update, the RAM will stay in a higher gear and run at lower rpms which will probably match or beat the others in fuel mileage. Only future test will show...
It's coming, one of the editors of Pickuptrucks.com (Mike Levine) said "I *definitely* smell a HD Shootout ASAP. And Rumble in the Rockies, Part 2" in the comments of the article I posted.
deerefan
Veteran Member
Love the cummins. But really, 800ft lb? Most of us don't need or will never use half of that. I guess as long as people keep convincing themselves they need it they will keep upping the power. Getting a little silly.
Markcuda
Veteran Member
Not for the "I need one bigger than you" crowd.:laughing: