Why can't we have a n/a gas engine, turbo gas, and diesel option with everyone b!+$ing. Truck threads on this site aren't very enjoyable anymore, all the gas fans bash any diesel option and the diesel fans bash the gas engines. Everyone just needs to relax, if I want a gas or Diesel engine that gets 10 or 50 mpg and might cost 100k it's my money why does every care so much.
You can spin it any way you want but the new Dodge payload capacities are unacceptable. It will catch on like wildfire at some point unless they correct the situation before it does. My guess is they will address it before any major damage is done. I just wouldn't want to be the sucker that owns ones of these "prefix" trucks. I drive an F250 and don't need the full capacity most of the time. But 490 lbs? Unbelievable! That is probably less than ANY vehicle minus the sub-compacts.
I agree with most of this. But the RAM ED tested does have 490 lb payload. The actual truck window sticker was posted, and all the trucks were weighed/scaled. I'm sure there are stripped down versions with the ED that can get the payload up closer to a half ton. If someone wants a commuter car\truck that they can haul light loads occasionally, this Ram ED would be a good choice.Before I condemn the new Eco diesel ram I will have to see the door sticker for myself. I'm not in the market for one but out of curiosity I will probably go look at there capacities for myself when they hit the lots. Most of the magazines and YouTube reviewers know less about trucks than my dog.
I agree with most of this. But the RAM ED tested does have 490 lb payload. The actual truck window sticker was posted, and all the trucks were weighed/scaled. I'm sure there are stripped down versions with the ED that can get the payload up closer to a half ton. If someone wants a commuter car\truck that they can haul light loads occasionally, this Ram ED would be a good choice.
I've never seen "Ram" and "ED" in the same sentence before.