Video: Rampage! The Test at Davis Dam

 

Check out our Rampage! The Test at Davis Dam video in which you can see exactly where we drove our two Ram 1500 V-6s during our recent Road Test. It doesn't have all the information we've loaded into our full Road Test story, but it'll give you a good idea how much driving and testing we packed into our time with the 2013 pickups.

 

Comments

I'm having trouble posting in the Raptor Nurburgring article. But here is a YouTube video of Sabine going around Nurburgring in a Transit.

Here is a You tube copy of the actual Nurburgring drive with Sabine. You would want to marry her!

@Sandman4x4
Thanks, go video. My original link didn't do so well as Lou pointed out, but it was interesting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KiC03_wVjc

I'm having trouble posting in the Raptor Nurburgring article. But here is a YouTube video of Sabine going around Nurburgring in a Transit.

Here is a You tube copy of the actual Nurburgring drive with Sabine. You would want to marry her!

@Sandman4x4
Thanks, go video. My original link didn't do so well as Lou pointed out, but it was interesting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KiC03_wVjc

I don't like the way the interior looks, especially cheap in the blue one. That being said, what really counts the truck excels at, and that's what matters.

That is a bit expensive at just under $38K for striped version and just under $44K for the loaded that is not rated to tow much more than 6,000lbs. My 2011 Ecoboost S-Crew 4x4 XLT with everything that could be had on an XLT besides a Nav Screen was MSRPed out at just over $43K with a towing ability of 11,300lbs. Not hating on the Ram, I just think that is a bit much for less utility. other then that, great review.

@Paul810
I've heard the US version of the diesel will be over 400ftlb of torque. That would have to make it about 220-230hp.

@Paul810
I've heard the US version of the diesel will be over 400ftlb of torque. That would have to make it about 220-230hp.

@Paul810
I've heard the US version of the diesel will be over 400ftlb of torque. That would have to make it about 220-230hp.

I'm going to agree that those prices seem excessively high for such a relatively basic truck--especially when you see that the "Tradesman" model is priced at $23K with the same engine.

I hate to say it, but truckers are getting screwed by the manufacturers nowadays. Even equipped as the red one is, the price shouldn't be over $30K of you ask me.

@DWFields
I've been saying this kind of change is going to make diesels more attractive.

This is just the beginning.

You guys will soon pay what we do to have fuel economy and less pollution.

I just hope your economy improves quicker so you can absord some of the costs, create more jobs so they can sell more pickups.

Sorry guys, I am not convinced, my 2011 ChevyZ-71 5.3 as been getting as much as 14mpg, towing my Airstream trailer, that weighs a little more then the horse trailer the red Ram V-6 was getting "well over 10 mpg"! and in the mountains of NH, I will never get less than 10mpg! and have more power! left over if needed, and when you add the fact that I paid only $28,900 out the door, and have 2/wd AWD 4/hi&4lo, I would never concider the Ram at that cost!, I would just go with the Hemi/8spd, when the time comes, and if that is what I choose, but I am still waiting to see what the hp/tq/mpg will be with the new 5.3/6.2, and If I was to spend over 40K on a truck, it will NOT be for a 6cyl truck!! I am also very interested in seeing what the 6.2 GM will get for MPG, if that combo touches 20MPG, that will be the one for me!

I like the fact that companies are offering colours in the interiors again. I didn't want a beige interior in my truck but unless I was willing to move up to a leather package, it was all that was around when I bought mine.

The performance numbers on these V6's are respectable. When one considers the Ram and Ford were both towing 95% of GCWR, it shows how well both truck brands have their drivetrains sorted out.

The rear end ratio's are becoming more irrelevant with today's new trucks. It made a huge difference in the day of 3 speed automatics, or 4 speed sticks. The difference between 3.21 and 3.55 is 10%. Not much of a factor with the gearing of any 6 or now with the 8 speed.

Sorry, one more point - saying that the blue Ram was a base model is misleading. The window sticker showed 2,995 dollars in options. Another point to consider is that when one steps up through the cab configurations, companies throw in more goodies with the bigger cabs. A "base" reg cab is considerable more plane than a base crewcab.

Lou: there is one more poit to consider, and that is the SLT is NOT the standrd truck to begin with, that is the Tradesman! and the entry level engine in that truck is the 4.7, as the 3.6/8spd is a $5oo option in that truck.

@Sandman4x4
Your comment about trim level differentiation brings to mind an interesting point.

Choice, or number of choices. I've read up on some marketing research and it pointed out that it can be counter productive to have to many choices.

I know this sounds odd. Look at a colour chart when painting your home.

Maybe the manufacturers can limit the level of trim within a range to 3 or 4.

In Australia most vehicles I know of only have 3 or at a max 4 choices. Even our US vehicles, which I think only have 2, lot of extra stuff and massively optioned.

@Sandman4x4
Your comment about trim level differentiation brings to mind an interesting point.

Choice, or number of choices. I've read up on some marketing research and it pointed out that it can be counter productive to have to many choices.

I know this sounds odd. Look at a colour chart when painting your home.

Maybe the manufacturers can limit the level of trim within a range to 3 or 4.

In Australia most vehicles I know of only have 3 or at a max 4 choices. Even our US vehicles, which I think only have 2, lot of extra stuff and massively optioned.

@Sandman4x4
Your comment about trim level differentiation brings to mind an interesting point.

Choice, or number of choices. I've read up on some marketing research and it pointed out that it can be counter productive to have to many choices.

I know this sounds odd. Look at a colour chart when painting your home.

Maybe the manufacturers can limit the level of trim within a range to 3 or 4.

In Australia most vehicles I know of only have 3 or at a max 4 choices. Even our US vehicles, which I think only have 2, lot of extra stuff and massively optioned.

@Sandman4x4
Your comment about trim level differentiation brings to mind an interesting point.

Choice, or number of choices. I've read up on some marketing research and it pointed out that it can be counter productive to have to many choices.

I know this sounds odd. Look at a colour chart when painting your home.

Maybe the manufacturers can limit the level of trim within a range to 3 or 4.

In Australia most vehicles I know of only have 3 or at a max 4 choices. Even our US vehicles, which I think only have 2, lot of extra stuff and massively optioned.

@Sandman4x4
Your comment about trim level differentiation brings to mind an interesting point.

Choice, or number of choices. I've read up on some marketing research and it pointed out that it can be counter productive to have to many choices.

I know this sounds odd. Look at a colour chart when painting your home.

Maybe the manufacturers can limit the level of trim within a range to 3 or 4.

In Australia most vehicles I know of only have 3 or at a max 4 choices. Even our US vehicles, which I think only have 2, lot of extra stuff and massively optioned.

@Sandman4x4
Your comment about trim level differentiation brings to mind an interesting point.

Choice, or number of choices. I've read up on some marketing research and it pointed out that it can be counter productive to have to many choices.

I know this sounds odd. Look at a colour chart when painting your home.

Maybe the manufacturers can limit the level of trim within a range to 3 or 4.

In Australia most vehicles I know of only have 3 or at a max 4 choices. Even our US vehicles, which I think only have 2, lot of extra stuff and massively optioned.

@Sandman4x4
Your comment about trim level differentiation brings to mind an interesting point.

Choice, or number of choices. I've read up on some marketing research and it pointed out that it can be counter productive to have to many choices.

I know this sounds odd. Look at a colour chart when painting your home.

Maybe the manufacturers can limit the level of trim within a range to 3 or 4.

In Australia most vehicles I know of only have 3 or at a max 4 choices. Even our US vehicles, which I think only have 2, lot of extra stuff and massively optioned.

@Sandman4x4
Your comment about trim level differentiation brings to mind an interesting point.

Choice, or number of choices. I've read up on some marketing research and it pointed out that it can be counter productive to have to many choices.

I know this sounds odd. Look at a colour chart when painting your home.

Maybe the manufacturers can limit the level of trim within a range to 3 or 4.

In Australia most vehicles I know of only have 3 or at a max 4 choices. Even our US vehicles, which I think only have 2, lot of extra stuff and massively optioned.

@Sandman4x4
Your comment about trim level differentiation brings to mind an interesting point.

Choice, or number of choices. I've read up on some marketing research and it pointed out that it can be counter productive to have to many choices.

I know this sounds odd. Look at a colour chart when painting your home.

Maybe the manufacturers can limit the level of trim within a range to 3 or 4.

In Australia most vehicles I know of only have 3 or at a max 4 choices. Even our US vehicles, which I think only have 2, lot of extra stuff and massively optioned.

@Sandman4x4
Your comment about trim level differentiation brings to mind an interesting point.

Choice, or number of choices. I've read up on some marketing research and it pointed out that it can be counter productive to have to many choices.

I know this sounds odd. Look at a colour chart when painting your home.

Maybe the manufacturers can limit the level of trim within a range to 3 or 4.

In Australia most vehicles I know of only have 3 or at a max 4 choices. Even our US vehicles, which I think only have 2, lot of extra stuff and massively optioned.

@Sandman4x4
Your comment about trim level differentiation brings to mind an interesting point.

Choice, or number of choices. I've read up on some marketing research and it pointed out that it can be counter productive to have to many choices.

I know this sounds odd. Look at a colour chart when painting your home.

Maybe the manufacturers can limit the level of trim within a range to 3 or 4.

In Australia most vehicles I know of only have 3 or at a max 4 choices. Even our US vehicles, which I think only have 2, lot of extra stuff and massively optioned.

@Sandman4x4
Your comment about trim level differentiation brings to mind an interesting point.

Choice, or number of choices. I've read up on some marketing research and it pointed out that it can be counter productive to have to many choices.

I know this sounds odd. Look at a colour chart when painting your home.

Maybe the manufacturers can limit the level of trim within a range to 3 or 4.

In Australia most vehicles I know of only have 3 or at a max 4 choices. Even our US vehicles, which I think only have 2, lot of extra stuff and massively optioned.

@Leutenslager aka TRX4 Tom, zveria etc.
I think that's the most multiple posts you've made.

Are you angry?

Having trouble getting your 'message" across?

Has Fiat/Chrysler stopped paying you:)

What you are is a low life troll of the worst kind.

You are prepared destroy other peoples' work (this site) because your ineptness.

If that is what guerilla marketing is about and you consider it the American way I think you are deluded.

Like I've stated in the past get off of this site.

Or maybe we should form a neighbourhood watch for forum sites.

@Lou
I do think different interior colour options is a good idea.

I've some poor examples of colour matching of interiors to exteriors.

Even some horrible interior colours schemes.

I was refering to trim levels.

BifAlform OZ: that is the biggest reason Ford sells soo many trucks to begin with! they have a truck level and model, color, trim engine and so on and so forth! they have such an amazing choice of trims and options! in other words "A truck for every owner or worker"! is the best PR they could get for any money!

@sandman4X4
I would be lost.

When I built my last house I ditched the paint colour charts and used a roofing company colour chart with 30 colours. Easy, it even had a section with 3 colours that can be used together.

I'm not saying not have choice, as I believe in choice. The article I read related to brands in supermarkets.

I'm also kind of colour blind, not the bad one with green and red, but tones of colour.

@sandman 4X4
Toyota does it here, a wide variety of choices. Others are catching up though.

@Big Al - Too many trim levels or options can be counter productive but as sandman4x4 has pointed out, Ford has the most options and sells the most. It is no coincidence that Ram has expanded their trim levels and have seen sales gains. GMC with its 2 truck, Professional (higher grade) and Chevy work grade (lower grade) has not done well for them.
Trucks are the "Swiss Army knife" of the motoring world.
I like the fact that I've seen only one other 2-tone Ford truck like mine.

@Lou
I've only ever owned one 2 tone vehicle. That was my 86 Navara (Hardbody style) King Cab. Royal blue on the bottom half and grey silvery top half.

It came with white walls believe it or not. It was a beautiful looking truck for its time.

It was the US version, it only carried 750kg, unusual for an Australian pickup. Nissan only had that particular model for 2 years with the reduced weight capacity.

I suppose as vehicle manufacturer numbers decline we will see more and more choices, it become more cost effective.

@lou
lol, so true! the 3.21 was faster than the 3.55!

@sandman

correct! the tradesman is a "filler truck" for this year just to get rid of remaining 4.7's. 2014 the tradesman will get the pentstar because of the least capability or the hemi 65rfe combo because of the production costs.

@everyone out there
the hemi is chrysler's cheapest engine to build currently. direct injection is a mystery for the hemi as there is hardly any room for it in the heads just as there is no room for multiair. the hemi is essentially a sohc motor reverted back to cam in block (see a cutaway at allpar). there is no room in hemi heads. but something to think about. if chrysler added the rumored aluminum block, cam in cam vvt from the viper, and full electric cooling fans (dumping the fan clutch completely) then the hemi would become expensive to build. the hemi is chrysler's money maker and will become a "filler motor' just as the 4.7. the hemi is cheaper than the 4.7 to build as well, with the same mpg's and better power and a more flexible block design. with the 3.6 8 speed pushing the same performance with better mpg's and the hemi pushing the same mpg's with better performance, there is no longer a need for the 4.7.

@big al

eventually the hemi will be replaced by something. the 4.8 V8 pentastar is rumored because if you divide a 3.6 by 6 you get .6 for the size of each cylinder. mulitply that by 8 and you get a 4.8 for a theoretical pentastar v8. as far as the rumors of pentastar: a v4 pentastar, an inline 4 based off a pentastar block, 3.0, 3.2, 3.3, 3.6, 4.0 pentastar v6s, and a pentastar 4.8 v8. idk about the rumors but the facts so far are 3.0 eventually with di and multiair, turbo and twin turbo. a 3.2, avaliable with a supercharger, and the 3.6. my guess is the 3.2 supercharged is to either replace the 3.6 (because the pentastar was designed for downsizing) or add an srt option for cars with the coming 9 speed.

@Josh
You are incorrect about the multi air.

The multi air has been rejected for use in the US because of cost to the consumer is unplatable.

The multi air will be used on the modified 3.0 twin turbo Pentastar used in Europe.

This is because the engine will be used in prestige vehicles and costs aren't a big concern as in the targeted market in the US where these engines will be used.

@Josh
A bit of a Ram man, building a repore?

The initial plan for the Phoenix engine series was to include a 4.0 litre version like you stated. That would give you over 5.0 litres in V8 form.

If it comes to fruition it should be quite a competitive engine.

The engine block is capable of accepting that size. The problem is can the heads be made to suit. That shouldn't be a problem as they can iron out the V6 heads when designing the V8 heads.

The 3.2 supercharged engine will be an intermediate engine between the 3.6 and the larger Pentastar V8/Hemi.

I read on the Fiat spa site that they will keep the V8 Hemi 6.4? for as long as possible, but it will eventually go.

That's what I've read anyway.

no one gets it. really the 2013 ram was supposed to be the 2014 ram but was rushed to counter the next silverado/sierra so it would not be overshadowed, especially considering the technology. 2013 rams have all the tech INCORPORATED into their design, but most 2013s will lack the tech. tradesmans get rid of 4.7s, expresses are bread and butter, laramies are lacking all the new tech until late in the model year. for everyone complaining about the new tech not being out yet, it will be out by the time it counts. second, even still i would love to have 2013 ram 1500 quad cab standard bed 2wd express 5.7, 6 speed, 3.92 limited slip. idk about you guys but if you have seen inside a 2013 ram 1500 it has more to offer off the lot than my 2007 thunder road did. not all of us can afford a brand new truck every year, but if i did the only options i would need to worry about now days would be powertrain. there are way too many standard features on trucks now days (mostly b.s. like traction control, stability control, t.p.m.s., blah, blah, blah) jacking up the prices. and the options today were not avaliable 10-15 years ago. those options are mostly standard now besides leather :). an express would make a good all around multipurpose vehicle that fits me with more than enough. besides for the hemi concious (like me :)) the hemi gains 5 hp from less parasitic loss (parasitic loss hurts mpgs too). who knows, with somewhat less weight (they say), less parasitic loss, and better aerodynamics, real world mpgs could have went up more than they say. with nitrogen in tires, full synthetic, and high octane you could get 22 mpgs with a 2013 hemi (possibly). 395 hp and 407 lb-ft with 20 mpgs still sounds good to me.

@ big al

how wrong about multiair? just the pentastar part i would presume. the hemi is not getting multiair because there is no room. even allpar explains it. if you look at hemi heads there is no room for solenoids. multiair is coming later this year to america, not on a pentastar but on a 2.4 "world engine". 1.4 darts already have it and darts will most likely lose the 1.4 by next generation/refresh because of low likeability (to u.s. buyers). the 3.0/3.2 with direct injection and multiair could replace the 3.6 easily. like you say, it would be expensive though. so you think 3.2 supercharged would replace the 4.7? 5.7? good possibility. idk, but imo the 3.2 supercharged would be a limited production somewhat or to replace the 3.6 in trucks to give more hp and same mpgs until the 3.0 di ma, with and without turbos comes along to replace all v6s and v8s up to the 6.4 hemi. and what is a repore? and also, all of this pentastar stuff makes good talk out of speculation but is tiresome to watch unfold with chrysler's slow time table. idk what they will do, i just am making guesses with what i have.

@Josh
Know your $hit.

Here is a cut and paste.

"A December 2011 financial report from Chrysler noted that the Pentastar had an “architecture for downsized displacement, direct injection, turbo charging, and MultiAir.” MultiAir was likely rejected for engines other than the 3.0 due to the cost/benefit ratio — the dual phased camshafts are cheaper but nearly as effective. "

@Josh
They way you write and your tone, inflictions etc. Your writing style is similar to TRX4 Tom's.

even as much as i love a hemi, i know there will be an end to it later. i just hope that if they do a pentastar v8 it will be avaliable just as much as hemi is right now. i don't want to be pushed into a v6. and if you buy used like me, bread and butter models is mostly what you get stuck with (haven't got the chance at a laramie quad cab 4wd yet because they are far and few in between).

The Chrysler propaganda site [Allpar] doesn't understand things too well.
Adding MultiAir to the Hemi is far easier than to the Pentastar.
The solenoid & accumulator would be in the block, mounted off the pushrod axis, particularly near the camshaft follower/lash adjuster are. The intake pushrod would be shortened slightly. The heads would be untouched.

Converting a dual overhead camshaft engine to Multiair is far more involved. Basically you develop an entirely new cylinder head because you have to change how you actuate the two intake valves.

Josh: I wonder if Mopar has even considered if they were to do away with the dual plug design, they would be able to take that room, and add DI, as the improvement the DI would give, would more than offset the need for the dual plugs? and to realy be the devils advocate, just imagine, if some company that either makes plugs, or injector systems, were to develop a combination plug/injector? just saying!

@George
That's basically what the cut and paste from Chrysler's financial report states?

It costs more, hence it will not be used in the more price sensitive US market.

Do you guys have Maserati's in the US, and would they come with the multi air V6?

@George
The information you are presenting is good.

But you aren't at an engineering brief.

Write to the audience and you may get some postive feedback.

There is a lack of engineering knowledge on this site.

Also remember alot of these guys are "backyard" mechanics who use their trucks as hobbies. Also its their way to go fishing, hunting, trailbike riding, camping etc.

They do have knowledge like mechanics and technicians that can't be dismissed, its good knowledge and feedback for yourself.

Just try?

MultiAir in the hemi is stupid. They'd would have better ROI by adding cylinder shutoff [MDS, or whatever they are calling it] to the other 4 cylinders, so that for the long haul highway driving that many people do in the US, the engine could alternate from one set of 4, to the other.
But that is also slightly pointless, because a wider ratio [besides the ZF 8hp70] transmission negates any marginal gain.

The most likely upgrade the Hemi will be receving is "cam-in-cam" + VVT on both camshafts.
I'd like to see the Hemi ditch the 2 valve head design for a 3 valve one, still via pushrods. Largest valve would be exhaust, 2 spark plugs flanking exhaust valve. 2 intake valves each actuated by its own reverse rocker arm + pushrod. [though this might not be feasible with 'cam-in-cam']

Direct injection isn't happening anytime soon. The best that one can hope for is partial Atkinson cycle.

@Big Al from Oz - all the heat in the kitchen has you edgy. Josh is very knowledgible and is NOT TRXTom. I see different styles. Same with TRXTom and DenverMike. Both Denver and TRX have a tendency to get chippy when pushed. TRX is a Chrysler fan and Denver a Ford guy.

Whom ever is hitting you with the multipostings is non-of-the-above.
Thats my impression.

I have complained x2 to the site administrators related to the multipost BS.

Rapore - I think that he meant "rapport".

@Lou
You're correct.

I just wanted the site to become more welcoming without the marketing I saw and disruption.

Now, I'm becoming one of them, sorry again.

It's sort of like Star Wars and the dark side.................... :)

@Josh,
Sorry, I came down.

@George
Sorry, also, I've had a tremendous challenge.

@Big Al from Oz - there are guys that have gotten under my skin too. It happens. It is even tougher when one gets targetted.
There are many that find your comments a welcome addition to this site.

@Josh
Know your $hit.

Here is a cut and paste.

"A December 2011 financial report from Chrysler noted that the Pentastar had an “architecture for downsized displacement, direct injection, turbo charging, and MultiAir.” MultiAir was likely rejected for engines other than the 3.0 due to the cost/benefit ratio — the dual phased camshafts are cheaper but nearly as effective. "



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 | © 2014 Cars.com | Privacy Statement | Contact Us

Visit our partner: MovingTruck.com