We Drive Ram 1500's Diesel in a Jeep

2013 Ram 1500 Rambox II
By G.R. Whale

Now that Ram has confirmed a diesel light-duty Ram, it’s just in time for us to sample Chrysler’s A630 VM Motori 3.0-liter diesel engine on the Jeep Grand Cherokee media drive. Yes, we know that the Grand Cherokee is not a pickup. However, we think it will give us a good baseline for what to expect when the EcoDiesel is dropped into the Ram.

We expect many systems to be similar in the Grand Cherokee and Ram, including the electrical architecture, the eight-speed automatic transmission and the engine choices. Jeep prices the diesel option at $4,500, and chances are it shouldn’t cost any more when dropped into a Ram.

A Grand Cherokee with the diesel option (the same versions that offer a Hemi) weighs from 5,065 to 5,374 pounds; the gas-engine Grand Cherokee weight ranges from 4,545 to 5,219 pounds. By comparison, the Ram 1500 base (with the V-6) weighs from 4,502 to 5,859 pounds, and the top GVWR of 6,800 pounds is the same as the Jeep 4WD. The maximum gross combined weight rating for the Jeep is 13,100 pounds where the Ram runs from 9,500 to 15,650 pounds, depending on its powertrain and gearing. Rams will use different transfer cases and slightly larger ring-and-pinion sets, and the Ram’s 17-inch tires and wheels are similar to the 18s on a diesel Jeep. The Ram and Jeep should use the same alternators.

Aerodynamics will be the bigger factor in making a comparison. Jeep’s quoted coefficient of drag value is 0.371, higher than the Ram’s 0.360, but we’re guessing a diesel Ram may not get all the high fuel economy tweaks. We don’t think that’s enough to overcome Ram’s larger front, so it makes sense to us that city mileage ratings will be similar but highway ratings will be slightly less than the Grand Cherokee. No doubt a lot will depend on gearings and tire choice.

The VM is a 60-degree under-square 3.0-liter engine with an iron block, aluminum heads, overhead cams and a compression ratio of 15.5:1. It uses a single water-cooled Garrett turbo in the back of the valley, solenoid common-rail Bosch injection (with up to three pilot and two post-injection events per cycle and 29,000 psi) and selective catalytic reduction. 

The gas tank has a a capless arrangement that wasn’t quite up to Jeep angles on the prototypes we drove; the tank can hold up to 24.6 gallon fuels, and the urea reservoir is sized to 10,000-mile refill intervals. The oil system has been developed for the steep angles one expects to tackle in a Jeep, and for cold-weather cabin performance Jeep has electric heaters in the air ducts.

Because the temperatures at the event were above freezing, we couldn’t test how long it would take to start the diesel in the cold. For us, at 53 degrees, the wait was no longer than the “ignition on” bulb-check function. The gravelly diesel growl is well muted, with injector tick quieter than some gasoline engine idles — BMW’s 2.0-liter I-4 comes to mind. If you’ve driven any recent 3.0-liter-range six-cylinder diesel, be it VW’s corporate unit, Mercedes’ 72-degree V or BMW’s inline arrangement, the sounds and numbers will be familiar to you.

Throttle response is average. Mash the accelerator from a full stop, and there’s a quiet step-off followed almost immediately by full power, and while it’s certainly not as fast as a Hemi, the diesel engine delivers an effortless midrange-rpm surge that will make passing just an excuse to exercise the turn signals. Jeep didn’t offer a zero-to-60-second time, but the Jeep feels competitive with the Germans, probably getting to 60 mph in the 7.0- to 7.3-second range.

Jeep hits that magic 30 number (EPA highway mpg rating) but only for the 20 percent of Grand Cherokees that are rear-wheel-drive; 4WD delivers 21/28 city/hwy ratings, very similar to comparably weighted competitors: VW Touareg (20/29), Porsche Cayenne (19/29), M-B ML350 Bluetec (20/28) and BMW X5 35d (19/26). Note that Jeep also claims 17/25 (17/24 4WD) with the 3.6-liter V-6 Pentastar and 14/22 (14/20 4WD) for the Hemi backed by an eight-speed automatic. That’s never more than 1 mpg different than the Ram V-6/eight-speed and only 1-2 mpg better than a Ram Hemi with the six-speed automatic.

VM Motori is a 50/50 joint venture between Fiat and General Motors but unless GM is sandbagging a well-concealed diesel program for the new Silverado or Sierra, Ram will be the first half-ton to market in the U.S. with a diesel engine. And if Nissan puts a baby Cummins in a Titan, our test title won’t be a misprint: Ram Diesel Versus Cummins Showdown.

2014 VM Motori 3.0L V-6 2 II

2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee II

2014 ZF 8-spd II



@TRX4 Tom
I know Big Al works on very "complicated planes" like my nephew. That is all my nephew and he can say. It does involve work for the US as well.

@TRX4 Tom
Diesel trucks engines have a narrower torque band and require more gears to perform work, also the power to weight ratio is much different than a SUV/Pickup.

Modern diesels like the VM diesel are more over square and this increases the torque band. But you still have torque coming in at lower rpms all the way to high 2 000s or even near on 3 000rpm.

As an example a gas engine uses 4 gallons per hour to deliver 300ftlb of torque @ 1 800rpm. A diesel will use 3 gallons or less.

Increase rpms to 2 500rpm what the difference between a gas and a diesel?

You stated you know about gearing, this data must be used to determine gearing, especially in todays mpg climate.

Where I live at costco gas is 3.11 right now. Diesel on average here is 22 percent more expensive. I didn't realize it was only a 2800 dollar option over the 5.7. That is quite a difference and changes how I feel. We'll see how reliable this engine will be. It get's very cold up in Idaho and a diesel in my experience is not as reliable and a lot more expensive to fix. If you do a lot of towing the diesel might be a good option. I've done cost analysis on a lot of diesel cars and they are almost never worth the price premium. Usually not even close. But I sure hope they can make this truck worth the premium and make it reliable. I don't think I'd buy a ram again anytime soon. Hopefully ford will follow suit and make it affordable.

Personally I think the new 8 speed is a great touch from Ram but even the vaunted ZF unit is getting older. It doesn't have the spread that some competitors are starting to offer but it does have reliability on its side. I ssupect that GM's 8-speed will be worth the wait in terms of sheer spread. I am sure it will help bolster those highway mpg's too since I suspect it will get it increased spread on a taller 8 gear.

I think the unit going into the Ram's would likely benefit from a short 2nd gear. the 1st to 2nd ratio is quite wide. I think going from 3.14 to 3.5 would allow towing a heavy load to be a bit easier and same for moving 3rd to 2.4 or so from 2.10. That being said I think the top ratio could be taller than .67. Maybe as low as .59? the VM diesel would have the torque to make good use out of that taller ratio as would the Hemi (maybe not the V6 though). That would give them a full 8:1 spread and likely some more drivability, especially under load.

I know that Chrysler's specific units they build in house will have some minor changes from the ZF sourced units but not to the gear ratios themselves. Still a big improvement from the 5 speed I had in my 05 Ram

The 8 speeds are an improvement. But the costs are quite higher than a 6 speed manual. We have the VW Amarok with an 8 speed auto. But 1st is quite low and VW did away with the transfer case.

TRX4 Tom asked me why I choose to state Ram should also offer a 6 speed manual. And I was answering him.

I have nothing against an 8 or even variable speed transmission in a vehicle. I was pointing out why the necessity for a 8 speed in a diesel isn't as significant as a gasoline engine and a 6 speed would suffice.

The fuel economy difference would be that slight I don't think it the 8 speed would pay for itself.

Have a look at our Grand Cherokee VM diesel in Australia and look at the fuel economy figures and they run a 5 or 6 speed auto. You will be surprised.

Also, I do see alot of comments on the costs of your pickups.

My initial comment was why Ram hasn't offered a lower priced diesel option and went for the most expensive option, when it might not be that necessary.

@ big al

I really wasn't trying to interject into your and Tom's "conversation" :)

I agree that for the diesel with the low end power and fairly vast curve a 6 speed is probably "good enough" and more cost effective but cost effective isn't sexy marketing, peak figures that one can splash all over some football and stock car racing ads are what will get people talking.

Highly mathmatically inclined people will always factor out all of the noise and decide what makes the most sense for themselves but the general public is innumerate and would rather see a few numbers to make a decision. Hence why we have to quote consumer interest rates in APR (not including things like fees and that sort of stuff). People are nearly incapable of doing 8th grade math to figure out how to compare things and make informed decisions.

Personally I don't mind the 8-speed since I know it has been a rock solid unit for ZF for years and it will give me most of what I want, even if it is expensive. It should last a good 200k miles if modestly maintained and I typically ditch a vehicle before 100k miles anyway (driving typcially less than 10k miles per year) I do wish Chrysler/Ram would have gearing specific towards this diesel but it is already paired with multiple diesels in Europe with great results so I am probably picking nits (except for that taller 8th gear that should be .59)

Never gonna happen.

Plans always change at the last minute.

I think that many will buy it for the sake of owning a diesel without doing any math or taking a realistic look at their driving profile. Any diesel for to and from work and occasional hauling is a waste of an engine. Any short commutes and the engine and emissions systems will never get close to proper operating temperatures. Those same types will complain about poor mpg and frequent regen cycles.
@howam00 - grade 8? I think that you are being overly generous ;) My training indicates that most adults function at a grade 5 level.
@paul810 - that 5+4 duplex transmission would put an end to the argument of not having enough gear ratio's. Last time I saw that kind of tranny, it was in my dad's B-Model Mack.
I recall lo, lo/lo, hi, hi/hi. its been a long time ;0

I do think that baby diesels are a good idea. I've done the math each time I looked at a pickup but that was in relation to HD's. I could never find a reason to buy one (In a HD).

One thing people tend to forget in calculating the payoff cost of a diesel is the improved resale value. The HD diesels carry a trade-in premium almost as high as the original purchase price.

2005 Ram 3500 4x4 Quad Cab dually SLT
- original option price of the Cummins over the Hemi: $5,555
- trade-in premium of the Cummins with 100,000 miles: $4,070

2009 Ford F-250 Super Cab 4x4 XLT
- original option price of the Powerstroke over the 5.4: $7,210
- trade-in premium of the Powerstroke with 50,000 miles: $5,293

You don't have to make up the entire purchase price of the diesel, you get most of it back on the other end. Even the troublesome 6.4L Powerstoke only costs about $2000 for 4 years and 50,000 miles. The reliable 5.9L Cummins only costs $1500 for 8 years and 100K on the odo. That is how you calculate payback - you'll have the fuel savings covering those actual costs in no time.

Al, why wouldn't a larger number of gears be more suitable for a diesel, as has been traditionally? Torque helps, for sure, but the problem is limited rpm range. I drove an older Dodge 1 ton with a Cummins and manual tranny once, it needed more gears because at the upshift the next gear was so high it could barely accelerate until the revs built back up. That's why road tractors have so many gears, less than 2000 rpm to work with. I know these small diesels rev higher, but still about half what a gasoline engine would.

so was this 3.0 the reason Gm Dropped the 4.5L Duramax???? They have NO IDEA the sales they lost by not offering that Engine in the tahoe, Suburban and 1/2 tons... that was going to be a "Game Changing" Engine... Oh well... I personally cant wait to see that GM Diesel in the Dodge... LOL So I can poke fun at all the Dodge/Cummins fanbois... LOL the little Cummins wont cut it in the Dodge.. got to go with a GM motor...LOL GREEEEEAT!

Did you have a good holiday? It's good to see you back.

You are correct, I have read a new diesel needs to run for 12km every so often to "burn" off the particulates that build up. Which means about a 10 minute run.

I don't know about the smaller diesels though (sub 2 litre), I would assume they would similar.

I never stated a larger number of gears isn't better or more suitable. But from a cost perspective I don't think it is more suitable.

I stated that Ram could have provided a 6 speed as well as a cheaper way into a diesel Ram.

As for diesel rpms, even my 3.2 revs out to 4 000rpm, the VW Amarok revs out above 5 000rpm. I can't tell you the 3.0 litre VM, but I would assume 5 000+rpm would be close.

But I don't ever go above 3 000rpm as it is pointless. Go up a gear and use the torque.

@Big Al from Oz - No Holiday unfortunately. Too busy. I was helping my son with his science project and a few other things ate up my time. Work was uncharacteristically busy too. Every time I turn around they are throwing a new bit of education at me. I shouldn't complain. My previous employer wasn't very good at continuing education.

@Robert Ryan: I have worked on "complicated planes" as well, (that's all I am saying) but the fact he has never designed a damn thing for vehicle, raises some eyebrows

Al, have you ever heard ASSUMING makes an ass out of you and me?

Here's what the Banks version does.


You can sit there and say a diesel makes whatever whatever per hour on so much fuel, and compare to gas engines. But you keep forgetting the higher price of diesel that aint comming down anytime soon, the extra weight of a diesel engine, (which will outlast that Ecoboost) the extra cost of the parts to go on it, (togher drivetrain, starters, etc.) and added cost of the package itself means IT AINT FOR EVERYBODY. It will probably be great for somebody that tows fairly heavy.

Al, I already took a random guess that a 3.0 gear would work with a .67 or .62 top gear, ok, maybe 3.21 tops. Somebody like your buddy George might come along complaining what, no 3.92??

If the rpm range where not as wide, more gears would only help it.

6 speed manual....the current Ram one was built what 8 years ago?

@TRX4 Tom
Look at my original statement and then what you asked of me.

I'm never stated a six speed is superior, but more cost effective and will give you performance results very close to the 8 speed.

Judging by the difference in costs between a Pentastar with an 8 speed. Why not offer the diesel with a 6 speed manual. It would cost much less than the 8 speed, thus saving the consumer money.

I even think I stated leave the 8 speed as an option. This can be for the people who have money.

A six speed manual would be good for a work truck, and if you aren't lazy anyone.

The savings on fuel doesn't really warrant an 8 speed. Even towing.

At least I have taught that little bit more about gearing:)

Judging by your comments your pride will not allow you to acknowledge that. But I know you appreciate what I'm educating you on. I make you think. Great.

@Big Al, I agree the manual would be cheaper to buy, but these car companies have to do so much on a large scale and they wouldn't sell enough of them to justify the r&d and manufacturing of them. Plus I believe autos make even more sense on a diesel. I had a drive of a new Cummins and tried manually shifting the auto 6 speed (I realize it's not the same), but it accelerated quicker when it was shifting in full auto. I held the gears too long. The auto shifts when it knows the torque of the motor will work better in a higher gear, which in a diesel, is way before the redline. Like you said "gear up and use the torque." I think you are right about the 8-speed not having much (if any) fuel economy advantage, but I still think it has its place because it should have a better feel than the 6 speed.

@Big Al,
as much as several people on this site including myself would want a manual transmission in a half ton with or without a TDI motor the fact is that its not going to happen, the new trucks would have to have some slight redesigns to accomidate the shifter and the clutch pedal, with all the RND and testing involved for an option that has so few takers its really pointless from a finacial stand point of the OEMs I would really love an F150 crew 4x4 with the 3.2 duratorq and 6 speed manual but the reality is that We might get the TDI option but definatly not the manual. there is just no money in a manual pickup in NA market.

@Big Al: no, nothing about pride. You really haven't taught me a thing. You would like to think people follow you and really learn from you. But you haven't said anything to really prove you have a clue as to what goes on with gears.

It is not a "One engineer fits all" world meaning just because you are some sort of engineer you can use rocket science to figure out gears, when you don't work in the auto field.

It doesn't take a college education to understand gearing. You know Al, what is the heaviest thing you have even driven on the highway? Not towing on a ramp to a hanger?

But the thing is you also contradict yourself. You talk about spread. Then you say the diesel in question here has a short powerband (actually it is fairly wide for a diesel) Alot of the manuals have a very numerically high ratio in low gear, part of that is to make up for the fact it doesn't have a torque convertor that when unlocked gives about 10% more gear to get things moving. You also can't directly compare the two because the torque convertor unlock and the extra rpm.

I did look up the Ram 2500/3500 trans, which has about an 8.03 spread. But the deal is, 1st gear is that real low granny gear. After that, 2 to 3rd and 3rd to fourth are not close, (in the 60%)while 4th to 5th and 5th to 6th are close.

This is where alot of the issues are with the current 545-rfe/6 speed in Ram 1500s-the ratios are not real close, except 2nd and 3rd, and the two overdrives, 5th and 6th. A much better spaced down the whole line after 1st would do wonders for efficeincy, a smoothness. Something in the order of 70 percent would do wonders. That 2500 trans might be very strong, and very heavy. I looked into a NV4500 for my RV that will pull, why do I want that much weight? I don't and maybe a Ram engineer wont either.

Yeah, that current six speed would be the cheap way out, but you can design it with closer gears for the sake of making it get better mileage and be driver friendly, in attempt to attract more drivers. Do it right!
Learn from the 545-rfe gear ratios! Oh wait-you have not driven one. The most combined weight you have likely ever moved was probably only 10,000 pounds and under. LOL!

Al, you just can't compare the ratios of an auto to a manual.

And no, I am not lazy. I have driven some 13 speeds. When I drove the trash trucks that had a 50 some thousand pound max weight, although I had two International 6 speeds autos, I would take a nine speed manual if my boss had given me the option. So I have driven a few heavy trucks, some 18 wheeler. More gears the better, unless you have something like a 600 plus hp hoss(I know torque does the work, but in big truck talk, diesels are referred to by their hp number)

So now you feeling somewhat more educated, mr engineer? (trying to be arrogant like you)

Damn, gotta school somebody with an education. Education don't mean common sense. Yeah, I have a brother that's a professor at a major university, aint saying where, but he knows lots of some things, but his education doesn't cover everything.

See Al, one thing about the 8 speed is that gears are rather close ratio. If George designed it, it might have an 8 or 8.5 spread, just because he wants the biggest possible number he can get without even knowing how the 7.03 spread would do cause he is just hooked on spread, and more is better, in his opinion. It's not worth it if the gears are so spread out.

The trans that will go in my RV has a 3.60 spread, now here we are with almost double that and somebody like George is crying a river because they won't back a truck with 3.92 gears (or more) If he wants to tow with that deep of a ratio, you can tow with 5th gear, which actually is a lotta gear.

But he tends to jump around, one momment he cries about 3.6 power, then he goes to comparing to some Lexus, and he says Ford needs 4.10s. As if the two have the same exact gears in the transmission!

It's the same people we have here complaining about Toyota having a gear advantage with the Tundra over a Ford, the Ford has more, gear, but the Toyota is much better spaced.

Ah, but yet I am talking about two more trucks you probably have not driven either?

Al, I could imagine you with your narrow mind seeing me in Springfield Mo this weekend, just me and my lady, and you would say "yup, another truck with only 2 people in it" But you wouldn't see the two kayaks in the back, thus making it impossible to drive her 1.8L Nissan that gets far better mileage then your diesel, at far less per gallon.

Autoblog did a test drive of the Grand Cherokee diesel and the V8 back to back and reported their observed fuel economy:

14mpg for the 5.7L Hemi
24mpg for the 3.0L TD

Quite the difference.

@TRX4 Tom
It's torque that moves your race car.


Sorry, upon further checking you are correct, VM remains a 50/50 JV between GM and Fiat. Don't know where I got the idea that Fiat was now in control. Sorry

Traction moves your vehicle.
It takes power to develop traction.
Power is torque & speed. Transmissions take input torque & speed, and produce output torque & speed.

Even though this is not my style, there is another take on a RAm 1/2t diesel, just imagine what one of those guys that "slams" the truck down 5-6or even 8" down to the ground, and with all the body airo kits out there, can you jusy imagine what kinds of mpg you could get with one of those? like a reg cab (for the light wieght) and short bed for the sport, and we could go so far as a 2 spd rear end? I would bet you could get as much as 35mpg with a truck set up like that for hyw cruising, and with all those grears and less weight, you could get the 0-60 times down low also. But my style would be a reg cab 4X4 with just a mild 2" level lift, with airbags for the extra cappacity, the 8spd, (would realy rather have a man-trans) but we all know that will not happen, just for the sake of the epa clean-air folks, I would imagine that would be a great off-road truck as well, either way striped down as far as you could go for the loss of weight, and just the equipment needed, that would be nice!

Actually Al, some oval tracks take hp, some take torque. Get with an engine builder and they will tell you a Martinsville Virginia (long paperclip) and a more ovall track like Tucson Arizona will be two diiferent engine settups. Sometimes, in dirt racing alot, people take torque or gear out to get better traction. Differant cam grinds, advance or retard the cam, gear choices, rod ratios, heads, intakes, headers, are a small part of things that can get changed for differant tracks. Sometimes torque will do nothing but spin tires, so in that case, get off the corner and let horsepower do its thing.

@TRX4 Tom,
A short roadcourse with slow corners needs a lot of low down torque. Longer tracks the torque can come in a lot higher in the rev range.

Finishing off my European "education" starting in Sept ,doing parts of Italy I missed than "Central and South Eastern Europe'" used to be all lumped in as Eastern Europe before Communism fell.

TRX4 Tom
We'll start off simple and based on 10.

Remember there are two types of machines, inclined planes ie ramps, wedges and screws. And there are levers, remembering gears are levers.

This is all theoretical;
We have a wheel (vehicle) that weighs 100lbs and is 12" (1ft) in diameter and we want to move it up an inclined plane (ramp) of 1:10 gradient.

What effort is required to move the "vehicle" up the "ramp"?

So if the wheel is 1ft in diameter how much torque must be applied to the wheel to rotate the wheel so it can go up the ramp?

This can be expressed in ftlbs.

I'll gradually add more information for you.

Oh, Tom when I had my business I built my own race car (ute)

All people worried about the cost of the option need to remember ie in the article in USA Today that announced the 1500 diesel. "Diesel vehicles have higher resale values than gasoline or hybrid vehicles, ALG says. For example, a 3-year-old VW Golf gas model today has a trade-in value of $14,144, or 61% of its new price. The same car with a diesel is valued at $16,093, or 65% of its original price", made you 4% in three years and you had the fuel savings. I love the people that have never owned a diesel that say they do the math but forget what the end value of their vehicle is at the end of their math. I will keep buying diesel vehicles and laugh all the way to the bank. Dealer's love a diesel trade in.

@Robert Ryan: Yeah, well you are talking about people that race on sticky tires. What, maybe you are thinking what Marcus Abrose used to race, Austalian Supercars, with really sticky tires.

Now I wont be doing any of that, just the SCCA autocross, and torque sometimes just gets you in trouble, unless you have sticky gumball tires. Not so great with street Dunlops. An old saying is "if you are spinning, you aint winning!"

Dirt track? The thing that evens people out is tires. Modifieds might have 600 hp, but if the suspension isn't adjusted just right, you spin away your tourque, and you get passed, sometimes by people with far less power.

Have you ever seen a dirt modified race? USRA or IMCA?

Here's a clip of where my old figure eight car won one of it's 3 championships, of course my car wasn't racing there in 2001 or whenever this is, my good friend I helped, the owner and driver then, before I bought it. He won MANY races with just a 273 Dodge, with exhaust manifolds no less, while alot of Chevy boys only spun off the torque of their 350s and whatever else, with headers. You would want to watch at about 2 minutes in for the figure eight stuff.


The 29 car back in the day before this, ran a Richard Childress/Dale Earnhardt v-6, and it got a championship at the shorter flat track up near Seattle. He didn't need all that much torque. Sometimes it just creates more problems on limited tires, like the dirt track tires I would use, on 8" rims. They are an asphalt take off. Throttle response is always welcome tho!

@Big Al: I'd like to see a picture of it, (the race ute) as for the other stuff, no resonse required!

Traction moves your vehicle.
"It takes power to develop traction.
Power is torque & speed. Transmissions take input torque & speed, and produce output torque & speed."

I don't think he understands simple machines like levers and inclined planes.

Don't have a picture, maybe someone in my family has. But that was over 30 years ago.

Traction moves your vehicle.
"It takes power to develop traction.
Power is torque & speed. Transmissions take input torque & speed, and produce output torque & speed."

I don't think he understands simple machines like levers and inclined planes.

Don't have a picture, maybe someone in my family has. But that was over 30 years ago.

Traction moves your vehicle.
"It takes power to develop traction.
Power is torque & speed. Transmissions take input torque & speed, and produce output torque & speed."

I don't think he understands simple machines like levers and inclined planes.

Don't have a picture, maybe someone in my family has. But that was over 30 years ago.

@ TRX4 Tom

Torque is not a positive attribute in an SCCA autox car? I could not disagree more. Torque is what allows a car to quickly pull away from course elements such as a pivot cone or Chicago box.

There is no such thing as too much torque only not enough driver smoothness.

Totally agree. ,
Yes sure have, one of the people I have known has won more than one WOO race.

An SCCA Autox car a grassroots racer?. Handling, torque, gearing and the right rubber.

@Robert Ryan: no no no, I am not talking about WORLD OF OUTLAWS.

I am talking A mods.

@Dav: sure, torques inportant, but with low pro tires they don't have as much forward bight, and reponsiveness is key.

You must run a stocker?

@Robert Ryan: These are nothing like a World Of Outlaw car. Although I never been near one, I would venture a guess there are alot more things to ajust in one of these A modifieds.


They have alot going on to hook up that power. The tires are not near as wide nor as tall as a sprint car, and World Of Outlaws runs a heck of alot more downforce in those huge wings. These are on 8" wheels. Not some big wide Hoosier/McCreary/Good Year.

I went to school with the winner of this race, in the blue 85. He knows his stuff.

Sure I can spend big money on Hossier autocross slicks, but my 225/50 17 Dulops will do fine.

My name isn't yours so I don't have big pockets.

When you guys calculate the savings in the diesel option you just calculate it based in fuel price. But in fact you have to deal with a lot more facts that actually make a diesel engine more reliable.

Simpler engine, less parts to fail
Less oil changes with synthetic oil like AmsOil
DEF is dirt cheap
Simpler electrical system under the hood

Yes the engine will cost a premium but if you want higher torque and a well proven engine why not give it a chance. I think the addition of the ZF 8 speed tranny will sure keep the RPM in the torque sweet spot to keep it going. Look at those old diesel trucks that have decades and keep going like nobody's business. I've seen an old Ford diesel from the 80's running with the original engine and in nice shape.

And in a lot of parts of the world diesel is actually cheaper than gasoline, like mine!

@TRX4 Tom,
We have about 120 Dirt Speedways, how many modifieds or other classes run on a night across the country who knows.
WOO is a blast. Kerry Madsen and Joey Saldana at Parramatta

Local Sprintcar racing.at Premier Speedway

@George C. Power doesn't create traction. Power and traction have nothing to do with each other. Traction doesn't move cars. A parked car can have traction, that's what keeps it from moving or sliding. A powered car without traction (or with too little traction) can have as much power as the driver gives it, but it will sit there spinning its wheels. Power creates acceleration. Torque is the ability to overcome resistance. Think of it in terms of turning a nut. A longer wrench or more weight (force) on the end of the handle will increase torque, making it easier to turn the nut. Power is how quickly the wrench is turned.

Traction is different to friction.

George is talking time and distance. Hopefully is TRX4 Tom keeps up we'll get there.

Like moving 1kg a distance of 10cm in 1 second expends a joule of energy.

I wonder if this post will multiply!

I wonder if this post will multiply!

I wonder if this post will multiply!

Post a Comment

Please remember a few rules before posting comments:

  • Try to be civil to your fellow blog readers.
  • Stay on topic. We want to hear your opinions and thoughts, but please only comment about the specified topic in the blog post.
  • Your email will not be shown.

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In

Home | Buy or Sell a Truck | News | Special Reports

Powered by Cars.com. By using this site, you agree to our terms of service | © 2017 Cars.com | Privacy Statement | Contact Us