|
Ram 1500 Diesel
Today, Ram officially announced that they will build a Ram 1500 with the VM 3.0 diesel engine; while VM is owned by Fiat, the company has long supplied Chrysler with diesel engines for vehicles sold outside of North America. The 3.0 liter V6 is a state of the art diesel which passes both American and European emissions tests, has strong power, low maintenance requirements, and good economy. This is the same diesel engine used in the 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee, which will reduce training and inventory costs when compared with the also laudable Cummins V6 diesel (a completely different engine than the Cummins straight-six which will continue in the Ram Heavy Duty models).
|
Wonder what the tow rating will be?
|
Now if only America would embrace the diesel the way European countries do. Maybe then it wouldn't cost me almost 70 cents more than a gallon of gas to fill up. Personally I wish they would release the diesels in the SUVs as well. My wife's Durango sure could use some torque :)
|
Originally Posted by Delforce22
(Post 3867088)
Wonder what the tow rating will be?
:party-smiley-004: Wannabe |
Originally Posted by Jay Gadsby
(Post 3867094)
Now if only America would embrace the diesel the way European countries do. Maybe then it wouldn't cost me almost 70 cents more than a gallon of gas to fill up. Personally I wish they would release the diesels in the SUVs as well. My wife's Durango sure could use some torque :)
The other reason is our diesel particiulate requirements are much more stringent than the EU. hence the DPF systems which are costly and prone to issues. Wannabe |
Finally! Great news and I hope its successful.
|
If it has the same setup as the Jeep ecodiesel with the 8 speed tranny we could be seeing near 30 MPG
|
Originally Posted by Jay Gadsby
(Post 3867094)
Now if only America would embrace the diesel the way European countries do.
|
Originally Posted by wannabe
(Post 3867096)
At least 20,000 since the HD has a 30,000 lb rating....
:party-smiley-004: Wannabe With that said there were rumors of this and I was excited that ford might do this and chevy, but nothing yet. I would guess they would be closer to the 3/4 ton diesel rating probably 12k. I know everyone talks well Europe does it , but if this is to work you have to make the MPG make sense. As diesel cost more. If you can make a half ton tow 12-13k and get 21/25HWY heck yeah youd have lots of buyers. But with with DPFs and such I see something like this towing 10-11k and getting 15/18mpg and at that point I dont see the cost working out specially when you factor fuel prices, maint cost, and the fact the engine is probably going to be a 3-5k upgrade in cost. |
Originally Posted by soldier4402
(Post 3867223)
probably not as your not going to have the frame or tranny to go along with it. Not count axles and heavier tires, the whole works.
With that said there were rumors of this and I was excited that ford might do this and chevy, but nothing yet. I would guess they would be closer to the 3/4 ton diesel rating probably 12k. I know everyone talks well Europe does it , but if this is to work you have to make the MPG make sense. As diesel cost more. If you can make a half ton tow 12-13k and get 21/25HWY heck yeah youd have lots of buyers. But with with DPFs and such I see something like this towing 10-11k and getting 15/18mpg and at that point I dont see the cost working out specially when you factor fuel prices, maint cost, and the fact the engine is probably going to be a 3-5k upgrade in cost. Wannabe |
Originally Posted by VetteLT193
(Post 3867211)
If it has the same setup as the Jeep ecodiesel with the 8 speed tranny we could be seeing near 30 MPG
Says same motor and I would guess same trans since they pull similar duty. It is a proven world combo so I would hope there are not the problems like Ford's string of diesels (soldier :angry-smiley-038:) I dont see where it will be cost effective in the long run for most. The article says not much up charge but I still expect some bump plus higher maintance costs and diesel price differential all affecting a true cost benifit analysis. Where I do see Dodge winning is being first to market with a 1500 diesel for those just clamoring to get one. Also with CAFE standards now hitting trucks, bumping the MPG makes sense from gamming perspective. Nothing in todays CAFE differentiates gas from diesel. I think the common buying public is in for a learning curve on the semi finicky nature of todays diesel fuel/engines vs throw gas in and go. At least diesel is more common than 10 yrs ago. Rolling out a 1500 diesel might mean the opening of more consumer CNG doors in the next 10 yrs??? |
Originally Posted by Delforce22
(Post 3867088)
Wonder what the tow rating will be?
Originally Posted by wannabe
(Post 3867096)
At least 20,000 since the HD has a 30,000 lb rating....
:party-smiley-004: Wannabe HP is less with torque slightly higher the the current Hemi offering so I would expect similar ratings. Frame, axles and brakes dont change from the rest of the fleet and that is the real differential in tow rating. Toyota just announced a 2014 HD that will challenge Big 3 dominance of the HD market. Watch out, I predict a market share slide from the Big 3 :whistle: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IVZ-tSg_tA |
Originally Posted by ChargeIt
(Post 3867304)
Here is the USA Today press release - http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...first/1917131/
Says same motor and I would guess same trans since they pull similar duty. It is a proven world combo so I would hope there are not the problems like Ford's string of diesels (soldier :angry-smiley-038:) I dont see where it will be cost effective in the long run for most. The article says not much up charge but I still expect some bump plus higher maintance costs and diesel price differential all affecting a true cost benifit analysis. Where I do see Dodge winning is being first to market with a 1500 diesel for those just clamoring to get one. Also with CAFE standards now hitting trucks, bumping the MPG makes sense from gamming perspective. Nothing in todays CAFE differentiates gas from diesel. I think the common buying public is in for a learning curve on the semi finicky nature of todays diesel fuel/engines vs throw gas in and go. At least diesel is more common than 10 yrs ago. Rolling out a 1500 diesel might mean the opening of more consumer CNG doors in the next 10 yrs??? But I think you hit it on the head. It is going to be more of a step in the right direction and future. But depends, if the engine get huge MPG gains then youll have buyers, but if you have something that gets the same as a gas, whats the incentive for your average buyer where like you said gas is more pump and run. Dont have to worry about fuel filters addatives, plugging it in etc. Sure you'll have the guys that do bigger towing get into it, but from a cost perspective and ease of use compared to gas will probably not hit home. You say there will not be an upcharge but like you I beleive you will have some premium. But I am estatic at the idea of the possibilites. Its not out of the relm to have this tow 12k lbs and get 25HWY or more. But with the DPF and such I am not so sure you would see that. |
Originally Posted by ChargeIt
(Post 3867318)
I like Wanabe's sarcasm. Todays Big 3 tow rating is more about advertising than reality. There is a new SAE tow rating standard but few use it, partially because they will get egg on their face. http://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/t...ing-field.html
HP is less with torque slightly higher the the current Hemi offering so I would expect similar ratings. Frame, axles and brakes dont change from the rest of the fleet and that is the real differential in tow rating. Toyota just announced a 2014 HD that will challenge Big 3 dominance of the HD market. Watch out, I predict a market share slide from the Big 3 :whistle: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IVZ-tSg_tA Toyota looks interesting but dont see any numbers, and that thing looks ugly as he**, sorry. I dont think Toyota is ever going to threaten the big three, they make a run at dodge but in the near future they are not going to become number one. And right or wrong they are always going to be seen as a Toyota. But what is good as I see them keeping the other three honest and pushing improvement. |
Originally Posted by ChargeIt
(Post 3867318)
I like Wanabe's sarcasm. Todays Big 3 tow rating is more about advertising than reality. There is a new SAE tow rating standard but few use it, partially because they will get egg on their face. http://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/t...ing-field.html
HP is less with torque slightly higher the the current Hemi offering so I would expect similar ratings. Frame, axles and brakes dont change from the rest of the fleet and that is the real differential in tow rating. Toyota just announced a 2014 HD that will challenge Big 3 dominance of the HD market. Watch out, I predict a market share slide from the Big 3 :whistle: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IVZ-tSg_tA |
About time someone makes a 1/2 ton diesel. I thought GM was on track about 6-8 years ago but it never happened.
The ex's BMW diesel X5 weighed in at over 6000 pound and got 32mpg highway running 75-80 and it was AWD. Thing hauled assss, especially considering the weight. Hopefully this Dodge will be comparable performance wise. |
Originally Posted by tnc110
(Post 3867530)
About time someone makes a 1/2 ton diesel. I thought GM was on track about 6-8 years ago but it never happened.
The ex's BMW diesel X5 weighed in at over 6000 pound and got 32mpg highway running 75-80 and it was AWD. Thing hauled assss, especially considering the weight. Hopefully this Dodge will be comparable performance wise. We were last told that the Ram 1500 with a Cummins V8 diesel should get around 18 mpg city, 23 mpg highway, with over 250 horsepower and around 440 lb-ft of torque. The V8 redlines at over 5,000 rpm, and is quiet as a gasoline engine. The 4.2 liter Cummins V6 is said to generate 190 hp and 400 lb-ft of torque (horsepower numbers may not be as high in production models of the measured numbers are not SAE net that was my fear after seeing these numbers, what is it giving me that isnt already there? Well its diesel, personally I dont care what it runs un and I am sure the market says the same thing. I still think this is a step in the right direction, only fear is with numbers like this the market doesnt buy in and it gets cut. |
I think you will see that a lot of the people that buy are going to be the diesel die hards. Some people just like em. They will be the guys that go through the trouble to delete the unwanted crap, add some hp and get their mpg numbers up. Nice thing about diesels, the more hp and tq, the better the numbers :) Unlike gas engines where the opposite has always rang true for me.
|
Originally Posted by ChargeIt
(Post 3867318)
I like Wanabe's sarcasm. Todays Big 3 tow rating is more about advertising than reality. There is a new SAE tow rating standard but few use it, partially because they will get egg on their face. http://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/t...ing-field.html
HP is less with torque slightly higher the the current Hemi offering so I would expect similar ratings. Frame, axles and brakes dont change from the rest of the fleet and that is the real differential in tow rating. Toyota just announced a 2014 HD that will challenge Big 3 dominance of the HD market. Watch out, I predict a market share slide from the Big 3 :whistle: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IVZ-tSg_tA |
Hd
|
Originally Posted by sonickevin95
(Post 3867864)
Im not sure as to why you would think that toyota just introducing an gd tundra that they are all of the sudden going to challenge a market that is completely dominated by the big 3. One thing and the only thing that thing that the big 3 has never relinquished dominance of is the full size truck market. Also its well documented that toyota and nissan serverly underestimated the owner loyalty among truck buyers. I would also like to add that ford sells roughly 50k f series truck monthly. Chevy 35k and dodge 25k. Toyota doesn't crack 10k on a monthly basis. So how do you figure that toyota will now put a huge dent in a class that they are dominated more then 10-1?
GM was pretty far down the 4.5 d-max path but decided the new gen V is actually a better solution making it unnecessary. I don't know exactly what that entails unfortunately. |
Originally Posted by rlj676
(Post 3868118)
Haha, I was going to post the same thing. Not to mention Toyota isn't actually introducing a HD.
GM was pretty far down the 4.5 d-max path but decided the new gen V is actually a better solution making it unnecessary. I don't know exactly what that entails unfortunately. |
Originally Posted by sonickevin95
(Post 3868305)
The diesel vs gas debate is interesting for sure.... you can make a great arguement for both. The ecoboost was revolutionary to the 1/2 ton market and its nice to see someone do something like this. Good for dodge.
|
Originally Posted by sonickevin95
(Post 3867864)
Im not sure as to why you would think that toyota just introducing an gd tundra that they are all of the sudden going to challenge a market that is completely dominated by the big 3. One thing and the only thing that thing that the big 3 has never relinquished dominance of is the full size truck market. Also its well documented that toyota and nissan serverly underestimated the owner loyalty among truck buyers. I would also like to add that ford sells roughly 50k f series truck monthly. Chevy 35k and dodge 25k. Toyota doesn't crack 10k on a monthly basis. So how do you figure that toyota will now put a huge dent in a class that they are dominated more then 10-1?
Agree, Tundra's frame is a weakness in extreme circumstances but lets face it, few 1500 and 2500 owners come anywhere close to taxing the ability of thier truck. (There will always be darwin award segment that clearly push the limits) Agree, it is unlikely Toyota will overtake the Big 3 in the near future in the 1500+ market as it sits today. Big 3 are very heavy into fleet sales that Toyota has historically not discounted prices in exchange for volume. Truck sales are also skewed by the heavy influences of union, trade and male brand ignorance (loyalty). Tundra has also not added a frame capable of an 8' bed Crew cab. Important for fleet sales but less in the higher profit consumer market. Better check the sales stats. January 2013 - http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2013/02...uck-sales.html Ford 46,800. GM 48,300 (Chevy 35,400. GMC 12,900) Dodge 20,500 Toyota 18,600* Tundra 7,000. Tacoma 11,600. *None of the big 3 produced a soild "Midsized" product so the market was abandoned (also helping drive total 1/2ton sales higher) Tacoma is close in capability to 1/2ton's of old. Note Ford with its "revolutionary" Eco only saw a small "boost" but is now lagging with sales increases of only 20% while GM and Toyota are enjoying over 30% increases YOY. Dodge is also down but if buzz holds, they should see late year increases with the new tooling. Ford barely out sold GM in 2012. 645,300 to 644,900. (a stastically insignificant diffence that could have been a last minute fleet dump with hopes to gain advertising bragging for another year) http://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/t...s-figures.html |
Originally Posted by ChargeIt
(Post 3868620)
Understand my post. Challenge dominance does not mean dominate. Toyota taking a couple points from the Big 3 will cause ripples though the trade pubs and investement markets.
Agree, Tundra's frame is a weakness in extreme circumstances but lets face it, few 1500 and 2500 owners come anywhere close to taxing the ability of thier truck. (There will always be darwin award segment that clearly push the limits) Agree, it is unlikely Toyota will overtake the Big 3 in the near future in the 1500+ market as it sits today. Big 3 are very heavy into fleet sales that Toyota has historically not discounted prices in exchange for volume. Truck sales are also skewed by the heavy influences of union, trade and male brand ignorance (loyalty). Tundra has also not added a frame capable of an 8' bed Crew cab. Important for fleet sales but less in the higher profit consumer market. I agree with you on many points, but you proved my statistical data for me. And not sure why the tacoma would be added to this equation when you are tal Better check the sales stats. January 2013 - http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2013/02...uck-sales.html Ford 46,800. GM 48,300 (Chevy 35,400. GMC 12,900) Dodge 20,500 Toyota 18,600* Tundra 7,000. Tacoma 11,600. *None of the big 3 produced a soild "Midsized" product so the market was abandoned (also helping drive total 1/2ton sales higher) Tacoma is close in capability to 1/2ton's of old. Note Ford with its "revolutionary" Eco only saw a small "boost" but is now lagging with sales increases of only 20% while GM and Toyota are enjoying over 30% increases YOY. Dodge is also down but if buzz holds, they should see late year increases with the new tooling. Ford barely out sold GM in 2012. 645,300 to 644,900. (a stastically insignificant diffence that could have been a last minute fleet dump with hopes to gain advertising bragging for another year) http://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/t...s-figures.html |
Also dodge being number 3, they still out sell the tundra 3-1!! I don't see them passing dodge anytime soon. Especially with the strides dodge has made in the half ton market.
|
Also in no way shape or form am I stating that toyota doesn't make a quality truck. Just not for me. Also not sure where the union comes into effect when it comes to truck sales. The union loyalty wore off decades ago when it comes to this country.
|
Originally Posted by sonickevin95
(Post 3868694)
The data you produced is exactly what I said. And if you combine gmc and chevy then sure there close. My statement was not to detract chevy in any way shape or form. It was to remind you how far behind toyota is in this market and let's all agree to leave the tacoma out of this discussion considering this was a half ton debate.
50k = 47k? 35 does = 35 but only a person looking to skew the numbers does not include identical platform models by the same mfg. 25k = 20k? Guess those are close enough tolarances for a Ford. I was originally willing to concede Tacoma but looking at Tacoma's 1350# payload vs several of Ford's f150 offerings from 1360# payload; GM 1500 models as low as 1510#; Dodge 1500 from 1385#; the Taco is right in the mix. Tacoma's conservative tow rating of 3500# is probably not that far off from the Big 3's notorious over rated figures. http://assets.forddirect.fordvehicle...872D808A87.pdf http://www.chevrolet.com/silverado-1..._long_box.html http://www.ramtrucks.com/en/towing_guide/ http://www.toyota.com/tacoma/feature...7182/7153/7153
Originally Posted by sonickevin95
(Post 3868732)
Also in no way shape or form am I stating that toyota doesn't make a quality truck. Just not for me. Also not sure where the union comes into effect when it comes to truck sales. The union loyalty wore off decades ago when it comes to this country.
When I was with FedEx sales, the reps that covered vehicle mfg plants made sure to drive respective mfg models when calling on the mfg, otherwise they were asked to leave their vehicle in an outside lot and be driven in. |
I said ROUGHLY 50,000!!!!!!!!! Which unless im not using the same numerical system you are then 47k is oftly damn close to 50k!!!!!! Also where did you get the payload numbers on the ford f150????? You can get the f150 with a 3k lb payload!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And as I stated before I wasn't pushing the FORD product because I don't have to, they sell just fine without me!!!!!! Just simply saying that the big three overwhelmingly dominate the full size truck market and guess what, im pretty freakin proud of that. Also why is it a discredit to the big three for selling a sh!t ton of fleets? Sounds like a great sales strategy to me and maybe toyota should start hitting that area of the market harder?
|
the simple fact of buying a yota is like going to a pizza store to buy chinese food. Just not going to happen. Toyota may or may not make a good truck, but nothing I have seen that makes them better than anybody else, maybe on par. Most toyotas seem to be bought by guys that use them for grocery getters or own a corolla as well.
|
Just for the heck of it I went to the Ford website and found the diesel option over gas was $8095 (F250). I opened up an Excel spreadsheet and put in the current price of regular fuel and diesel fuel here in the Pacific Northwest; 3.50 reg, 4.20 diesel. If the gas truck averaged 14 m.p.g. and the diesel truck averaged 18 m.p.g. in 50,000 miles you would get $833.00 of the over 8k you spent on the diesel option. Even if the "spread" in m.p.g were doubled the break-even point would be somewhere in the 250k mile range. I realize there are other important cost factors but for someone like me who has only 58k miles on their 2001 Truck a diesel option doesn't pencil out. The Eco Boost at under a +1k makes a lot of sense "if" it has the tow rating for your needs IMO.
|
Originally Posted by Wes Burmark
(Post 3870027)
Just for the heck of it I went to the Ford website and found the diesel option over gas was $8095 (F250). I opened up an Excel spreadsheet and put in the current price of regular fuel and diesel fuel here in the Pacific Northwest; 3.50 reg, 4.20 diesel. If the gas truck averaged 14 m.p.g. and the diesel truck averaged 18 m.p.g. in 50,000 miles you would get $833.00 of the over 8k you spent on the diesel option. Even if the "spread" in m.p.g were doubled the break-even point would be somewhere in the 250k mile range. I realize there are other important cost factors but for someone like me who has only 58k miles on their 2001 Truck a diesel option doesn't pencil out. The Eco Boost at under a +1k makes a lot of sense "if" it has the tow rating for your needs IMO.
Just curious, did you run the same comparison for the EcoBooost and the 5.0? |
Originally Posted by Wes Burmark
(Post 3870027)
Just for the heck of it I went to the Ford website and found the diesel option over gas was $8095 (F250). I opened up an Excel spreadsheet and put in the current price of regular fuel and diesel fuel here in the Pacific Northwest; 3.50 reg, 4.20 diesel. If the gas truck averaged 14 m.p.g. and the diesel truck averaged 18 m.p.g. in 50,000 miles you would get $833.00 of the over 8k you spent on the diesel option. Even if the "spread" in m.p.g were doubled the break-even point would be somewhere in the 250k mile range. I realize there are other important cost factors but for someone like me who has only 58k miles on their 2001 Truck a diesel option doesn't pencil out. The Eco Boost at under a +1k makes a lot of sense "if" it has the tow rating for your needs IMO.
|
Originally Posted by mpally
(Post 3870036)
I'm not sure you even had to prepare a spreadsheet to determine that it would be nearly impossible to recoup the cost of a diesel over a gasser if it's your DD. The advantage of the diesel is not gas mileage alone as you mention.
Just curious, did you run the same comparison for the EcoBooost and the 5.0? Lets say 50k miles. Eco gets 16avg vs 15avg on the 5.0. I will go with fuel price here today in NY 4.05 for regular. The eco will net you $875 over 50k so pretty much pay for its self. This is going off of advertised MPG. Look at diesel quick here. Diesel today was 4.40 my last F250 got 13mpg stock with DPF no tune. Over 50k miles both gas engines save you around $4k along just in fuel. Factor in up charge of the diesel, insurance is cheaper on gas and reg. You got could be talking close to a $15k savings in 50k on a gas engine, and thats why I got out of it, on paper it was a no brainer. But everybodys needs are different. |
mpally - I did not look at total cost of ownership of an F150 5.0 VS Eco Boost. I would probably go with the Eco Boost due to the additional tow rating as well as more torque at a much lower r.p.m. The cost for the Eco Boost is under 1k extra. Soldier owns an Eco Boost and as he mentioned above, it seems to pencil out on top of having a nearly 2000 towing advantage over the 5.0, 9700# for the 5.0 and 11,300# for the Eco Boost with proper gearing.
|
Originally Posted by soldier4402
(Post 3870716)
I did and its very close factoring in what Ford Claims the ECO gets 1MPG better.
Lets say 50k miles. Eco gets 16avg vs 15avg on the 5.0. I will go with fuel price here today in NY 4.05 for regular. The eco will net you $875 over 50k so pretty much pay for its self. This is going off of advertised MPG. Look at diesel quick here. Diesel today was 4.40 my last F250 got 13mpg stock with DPF no tune. Over 50k miles both gas engines save you around $4k along just in fuel. Factor in up charge of the diesel, insurance is cheaper on gas and reg. You got could be talking close to a $15k savings in 50k on a gas engine, and thats why I got out of it, on paper it was a no brainer. But everybodys needs are different. Even the diesel cars don't have any real advantage over their gas counter parts unless your driving 30/40k+ miles a year to see a "decent" difference. With the trucks at least it's not just about mpg, but that effortless power and torque when towing that a n/a gas engine can't match for efficiency. Makes sense though in suvs like the X5 and others where your not paying an arm and leg for the diesel motor, heck some diesel cars/suvs start about the same or lower price then the gas counterpart.... HD pickups rape you but people are willing to pay. Diesel trucks though see massive improvements in mpg and power, lower egts etc though with mods and getting rid of the dpf and f'n regen mods. But then your "tampering" with your warranty and new ECUs can still show detection to a dealer even if put back to stock with a tuner that's "non detectable". |
Originally Posted by Quicksilver
(Post 3871593)
Yeh this is what sucks with diesel, stock all the big 3 suck now, you'd be lucky to even approach the rated numbers, none of our trucks did with all the egr and dpf etc crap. And diesel is nutz $$, I just filled up, reg/premium was 3.81 and 4.19, diesel was 4.50 which was high but usually averages at least 20-30 cents over premium. I remember when a couple years ago diesel was cheaper then regular or about the same for a long time, fast forward..what.. like 3-4 years?!? and it's cost has sky rocketed.
My point? It was at least 8-9 years ago that diesel was cheaper than gas. Buck |
Originally Posted by buck183
(Post 3871797)
It wasn't a couple years ago that diesel was cheaper, it was much longer than that. I purchased my first and only diesel in August of 2003. I was excited about being able to purchase cheaper fuel to justify my investment. Within 2 years or purchasing that truck diesel surpassed gas in cost and it NEVER went back.
My point? It was at least 8-9 years ago that diesel was cheaper than gas. Buck |
This is an xb with the GS upgrade clothe seats full gauge dash ect. This can be done by the technician itself is very easy to handle. A beautiful car to own and use. Disclaimer I'm an Aussie, but a RAN M.
|
Originally Posted by buck183
(Post 3871797)
It wasn't a couple years ago that diesel was cheaper, it was much longer than that. I purchased my first and only diesel in August of 2003. I was excited about being able to purchase cheaper fuel to justify my investment. Within 2 years or purchasing that truck diesel surpassed gas in cost and it NEVER went back.
My point? It was at least 8-9 years ago that diesel was cheaper than gas. Buck |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:51 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.