2019 Ram 1500 Four-Door: Spied

Ram1500ud.g18.KGP.ed II

Although Ram took a small hit in September sales, dropping less than 2 percent from September 2016 numbers, we're predicting the truckmaker will beat 2016 sales numbers by almost 5 percent by year end. And since the Ram brand is one of only two moneymakers in Fiat Chrysler Automobiles' stable lately (the other is Jeep), you can see why there's a lot riding on the new Ram half ton, likely to debut later next year.

It's unclear exactly what existing or new trim level the pictured half-ton pickup truck is sporting or what materials the body is made from, but there are some cues that let us know Ram designers are busy and want to shake things up.

Here's the latest missive from our spy shooter:

"Sometimes it's all about being in the right place at the right time. From what we can see here, a slimmed down version of the Ram's crosshair grille will remain flanked by all-new headlights, giving the 2019 Ram 1500 a more technical look than the current model. The grille gets a new chrome brow that stretches the full width of the front end, with a small notch that continues up into the hood. The Ram's hood is more chiseled than today's model, a theme that continues throughout the rest of the pickup's redesigned bodywork.

"The new Ram's badging represents a complete departure from the normal convention, with a metallic badge boldly displaying the '1500' and 'Hemi 5.7 L' specifications installed into the trailing edge of the hood — just above the front fender.

"The Ram's overall surface development is more chiseled and detailed than the current model, with a lower character line that kicks up at the ends as it reaches the front and rear wheel arches. The smoothness of the current Ram gives way to more carved details and surface sculpting, for a more complex design, making today's truck look a bit slab sided.

"The door handles on this prototype are body colored with chrome inserts, giving it a more upscale appearance.

"The rear tailgate gets clean styling with subtle sculpting. Judging from the mounting holes visible on the tailgate, it appears that prominent Ram badging will be a feature of the rear end. We also caught the next Ram's rear fender completely undisguised at another location, showing further surface development details.

"The taillights are reminiscent of the current Ram lights, but eschew the heavy LED features for a subtler effect with frosted white slits. The taillights appear to have a protruding section that includes the backup lights, and perhaps a sensor array in higher-end trucks.

"We're hearing the 2019 Ram 1500 is reportedly scheduled to make its official debut at Detroit's North American International Auto Show in January."

KGP Photography images

 

Ram1500ud.g03.KGP.ed II

Ram1500ud.g02.KGP.ed II

Ram1500ud.g08.KGP.ed II

Ram1500ud.g09.KGP.ed II

Ram1500ud.g12.KGP.ed II

Ram1500ud.g04.KGP.ed II

 

Comments

Kinda reminds me of when Dodge introduced their new "Big Rig" pickup truck styling back in 1994. People either loved it or hated it. Seems many secretly liked it, but wouldn't admit it in public.

Many credit Dodge with starting the truck wars and putting trucks where they are today. Up until 1994, the pickup truck market was pretty stagnant.

The badge says 5.7 L, seems I read the 5.7 is going away? Posted by: jchl4 | Oct 17, 2017

@jchl4

hemi go away?

Stranger things have happened. Ford renamed their very successful Taurus sedan the Ford 500 for a few years. Dumb!

Ford had a pickup they called the Sport Trac, but it should have been called Ranger. Might have sold better.

GM and Chrysler have done similar dumb things over the years.

The 1500 Ram hemi is a gold mine for FCA. Let's hope they have the good sense to keep it that way.

Up until 1994, the pickup truck market was pretty stagnant.
Posted by: Longboat | Oct 17, 2017

@Longboat

Totally agree. Go back to 1990 and look at the half ton trucks. yawn.

@papajim, Ford does a lot of trickery with their name plates. The Taurus was a midsize sedan then when they got rid of the Crown Victoria they came out with a new full size and called it a 500, when it didn't sell they stuck the Taurus name on it. Then they discontinued the old Eplorer and came out with a new Ford Freestyle and stuck the Explorer name on it. The current Explorer is based on a Ford Taurus/Freestyle.

The Hemi is rumored to live on for a couple more years but will be altimatly be replaced with a turbo v6.

Ford does a lot of trickery with their name plates. Posted by: Joe | Oct 17, 2017

@Joe

Agree. But do you think it's effective---does it sell more cars?

I think it takes years of advertising and billions of page-views to create an object in consumer's minds. Change it? For what?

Rolex has made fine wrist watches for a very long time. Do you see THEM changing their name? ditto Mercedes. It's crazy.

I think Ford is a great company sorely in need of new people at the top. The RAM 1500 hemi is the bread and butter of FCA. They'd be real smart to keep it that way.

I like the headlights, I like the hemi, but...

Kinda saddened by this. I'm a Ram fan, but I think it looks like a durango's grille with a chevy's hood. The camo photos give the truck a good sense of proportion, but that bottom photo?
Looks and angles can be deceptive, but the tailgate looks gigantic, and the fascia looks... small? The bumper looks 2 feet deep - I'm guessing there's no removable rubber/plastic air dam? Just straight metal all the way down 5in from the ground because EPA/CAFE MPG reasons.

Sad. I'm hoping this is an intentional leak for feedback, and that they make some changes.

Has a I'm sad today look...or oopsss...i just peed where I shouldn't have!!!

Yea, it looks nice. Finally, we don't need to joke about ridiculous looking bull nostrils! It appears to be slightly lower profile and possibly better aerodynamics.

American Pickups are the best roundup of vehicles on the planet.
We are the real fortunate people who get to pick from all the best.
But they sometimes are too slow to make great changes in styling more so than powertrains and equipment.
That being said, this RAM is head and shoulders above the ongoing design cues from them for a while.
Now if they will beef up their payload then they will have a real player, no excuses.

Sad. I'm hoping this is an intentional leak for feedback, and that they make some changes.

Posted by: RamGuy | Oct 17, 2017 9:19:42 PM

Doubtful. It would appear that the dies for stamping the body panels are done. This truck looks like an early production sample. Maybe they'll facelift it earlier if buyers don't like it. I'm just glad they didn't use that god awful Rebel grill with the catfish/mustache look.

Is that a brand new full size Dodge SUV sitting next to this Ram in one of the pictures? And why isn't anyone talking about it?

Is that a brand new full size Dodge SUV sitting next to this Ram in one of the pictures? And why isn't anyone talking about it?
Posted by: Fred | Oct 17, 2017

@Fred

Totally agree. I'd love to see RAM deliver a family of truckish SUVs of the sort that GM has. A RAM branded half ton 3-row seats station wagon of the Suburban/Yukon type.

Recent GM models have gone a little to squishy in the direction of limousine, boulevard ride and nice leather/wood interiors. More at home with a pair of big golf bags in the back and less at home with a pair of bird dogs or even a deer carcass.

Perfection in this regard would be an homage to the old International Harvester Travel All. C'mon RAM, you've got the perfect platform!

Is that a brand new full size Dodge SUV sitting next to this Ram in one of the pictures? And why isn't anyone talking about it?
Posted by: Fred | Oct 17, 2017

Nope. Because it's just a Jeep Cherokee.

it's just a Jeep Cherokee. Posted by: Ken | Oct 18, 2017

@Ken

there's nothing wrong with a Jeep Grand Cherokee that a few more inches of wheelbase and 1000 lbs of solid American made know-how and steel wouldn't fix perfectly.

Oh yeah and no six cylinder engines need apply, thank you. V8 power. Or better yet revive the Chrysler V10 for SUV duty. Even sell them to the Marines and the Seals. Perfect.

That's not a Grand. Just a Cherokee.

I don't have a problem with either. Just stating what it is.

Just a Cherokee. Posted by: Ken | Oct 18, 2017

@Ken

I hope the Cherokee cooties did not get on the RAM.

Grand Cherokee is a Daimler model of some distinction, while the current-gen Cherokee is a lame FCA invention that uses the Cherokee name to hide a pukey Fiat grocery getter.

Hopefully smart people at RAM will save the Jeep brand from FCA. A heavy big-block V8 or V10 powered station wagon of the IH Travel All sort would help us forget the FCA influence.

@papajim--Maybe what you say is true but what should be looked at closer is not the size of the vehicle but the size of the driver behind the wheel. A full size to someone who is 6 foot and up may feel just right. But if you're 5 foot 5 inches and below a full size SUV may feel too big. Families are getting smaller and they don't need bloated full-size cars like they did 20 to 40 years ago.

They killed the classic Ram design. That one was unique, with a huge personality. I'd say that is iconic and says THIS IS AMERICA like no other pickup in the market.

The new design is totally aseptic, nobody would know it's a RAM without seeing the badge. Seems designed by a German robot. I think it's an error.

A generally good looking truck BUT.. why the badge on the hood ??? Looks like a total afterthought. Hopefully it's just held on with 2 sided tape and no holes.

Tundra + GMC = New Fiat

Nice move on the badging. Its been a real headache for way to long for business owners looking to have door graphics/signs.

But if you're 5 foot 5 inches and below a full size SUV may feel too big. Families are getting smaller and they don't need bloated full-size cars like they did 20 to 40 years ago. Posted by: Jeff S | Oct 18, 2017

@Jeff S

I guess America's "families" you refer to disagree.

They buy millions of big SUVs because they're a perfect fit. I admit that some families are just right with something generic like the Toyota Highlander, but that need is already being met in the market by Nissan, Toyota and Ford.

You would not want to compare sales figures for GM's big SUVs to something like the Honda Pilot would you?

ugly ugly omg ugly

The Taurus was a midsize sedan then when they got rid of the Crown Victoria they came out with a new full size and called it a 500, when it didn't sell they stuck the Taurus name on it. Posted by: Joe | Oct 17, 2017

@Joe

Your facts are cool but you got the timing wrong.

They made the Crown Vic until 2011. The Ford 500 came out in 2004 as a 2005 model, and eventually replaced the incumbent Taurus.

After 3 years of mixed success they renamed the Ford 500 as the (new) Taurus in 2007 or so.

Even after the Ford 500 came out, they still built and sold the previous generation of Taurus sedans to fleet buyers for a couple of years. October 27, 2006 was the last day of the 4th generation Taurus and they closed the plant as well.

For all the negative commentary I'm seeing here, personally I think that front end is the best looking full-sized truck out there. I do think that center ridge is unnecessary but it does at least give a visual nod to aerodynamics and gives it a reasonably sleek look without an offensive, blocky face.

Do the lines come from another truck? Who cares? GMC hasn't used those lines in over 20 years and these are fresh and rounded enough and include enough differences that it's not going to be mistaken for a GMC, ever.

Now if they'd only make a SMALL truck with that kind of look. It shouldn't be all that hard, after all.

Looks like a Dakota.

That's a fail to me.

The people I know that buy those trucks buy them for the soft ride and big rig looks. Changing the looks drastically could be a major set back for Ram.

So I guess making it look like a Dakota (mid-size) is the next evolution seeing as though the payload capacity on the rams most people buy are not max rated. The GM mid-size trucks can be spec'ed higher than some of the ram offerings so perhaps this is their way to compete in the mid-size market.

Interesting choices on Fiat's first go for a major redesign.

Now if they'd only make a SMALL truck with that kind of look. It shouldn't be all that hard, after all. Posted by: Road Whale | Oct 18, 2017

@Roadwhale

They WILL make a small truck as soon as they can identify a market for it.

Building a "small" truck as you define it is prohibitively expensive today. The conditions that made it possible 35 years ago no longer exist. Today's small truck would have to include a full suite of air bags, electronic stability controls, hi tech emissions gear and multi-speed auto trans.

I doubt that any of the world's top automakers can produce a truck to your "small" specification that would retail at a lower price than the popular entry level half ton trucks do, which by the way, is the biggest challenge facing the companies that are making a midsize truck today.

New look is solid , its growing on me.....

Hopefully they have competitive weight , payload and ACTUAL towing capability. Rams have been pretty poor in these respects compared to GM and Ford for the past several years.

Hopefully they have added a telescoping wheel, about the only thing they didn't have inside and need.

Hopefully they have increased Hemi power and torque (though with the 5.7L badge I am a bit disappointed they MAY not offer the 6.4L).

Hopefully interior continues to be strong ....they have had an excellent interior.

Will be interesting to see how it turns out....

Not bad not good, it's a vanilla edition of the current truck, best looking dodge trucks are the 92/94 trucks

Is the Ecodiesel back? That's what I want!

Man I love the look of this Truck!

If only my wife could ride in a truck with springs in the rear, no way to add a leaf!

Is this a GM? Looks alot like a GM and Chev. And Ram shouldn't give up on the big rig front end look. That's what sets it apart from Chev and Ford.

"They WILL make a small truck as soon as they can identify a market for it.
"Building a "small" truck as you define it is prohibitively expensive today. The conditions that made it possible 35 years ago no longer exist. Today's small truck would have to include a full suite of air bags, electronic stability controls, hi tech emissions gear and multi-speed auto trans.
"I doubt that any of the world's top automakers can produce a truck to your "small" specification that would retail at a lower price than the popular entry level half ton trucks do, which by the way, is the biggest challenge facing the companies that are making a midsize truck today." ---- Papa Jim

Wrong again, PJ. Both FCA and GM are already building true, "small trucks" for use in South- and Central America, including Mexico. By no means would it be "prohibitively expensive" since they'd only need to modify existing platforms.

And obviously there's a market, since those trucks do reasonably well in the markets they're currently used. And if they have a market for them AND bigger trucks, then so do we.

No, it's the vocal minority that's keeping these things out, NOT the lack of a market. It's only a matter of time before one of them realizes there's an eager market just waiting for a sub-$20K truck.

Wrong again, PJ. Both FCA and GM are already building true, "small trucks" for use in South- and Central America, including Mexico. By no means would it be "prohibitively expensive" since they'd only need to modify existing platforms.

Posted by: Road Whale | Oct 18, 2017 5:10:16 PM


They're prohibitively expensive to make because the EPA bases emissions requirements on wheelbase. It's a lot more expensive to make a small truck meet new emissions requirements than a "big" midsize truck. The cost is in powertrain development, not the truck platform itself. Maybe someone could do an electric only compact truck but range, towing and payload would be a massive challenge, IE very expensive too.

There are some who say that this truck will overtake Chevy, I respect your motivation towards this truck and the potential that it will bring when comparing it to the outgoing RAM, but until Consumer Reports, Motor Trend and Truck Trend do their evaluations and we get a full updates on Tech, Horsepower/Torque ratios, Towing and Hauling capabilities between that of RAM, GM and yes Toyota will also have a new truck as well, no one is considered to be a winner just yet!!

its only a matter of time before one of them realizes there's an eager market just waiting for a sub-$20K truck. Posted by: Road Whale | Oct 18, 2017 5:10:16 PM

@roadwhale

My point exactly.

Small and midsize trucks cost as much to make as entry level 1/2 ton trucks do. There ain't any new sub $20k trucks on the horizon in North America.

I'd like a great $3 dollar steak dinner like we used to have back in the 1960s but it's not happening today when wholesale beef prices are at least 10x what they were back then.

You're dreaming.

They're prohibitively expensive to make because the EPA bases emissions requirements on wheelbase. It's a lot more expensive to make a small truck meet new emissions requirements than a "big" midsize truck. Posted by: Brick | Oct 18, 2017

@Brick

I've commented on this so often I'm getting a brain freeze thinking about it.

Simply put, the business conditions that existed in the 1970s when compact trucks like the little Toyota and the little Nissan were the rage, just don't exist anymore. Back then you could build small sedans and coupes on the same line as the small trucks because they were all Front Engine/Rear Drive, body-on-frame vehicles.

Today all the small cars are unibody FWD cars and share none of the architecture of the little pickups.

They share very few of the components. Back then you could build pickups from the same parts catalog as the sedans. No more.

That's why it doesn't work.

EPA and CAFE are the easy part.

Please keep the tail pipes in the bumper I've got a 2017 Ram crew cab and absolutely love it

Please do not screw up a good thing leave the front end ALONE PLEASE.The 2017 looks the best it has ever had

@RoadWhale I don't think there's market in NA for the Fiat Strada

They copied the 2019 GM trucks tires. Just trying to copy the sales leader GM. Nice try rammers. Looks like the grille in my 1987 C/K 6.2 prototype. GM had satellite radio before there were satellites.

"They're prohibitively expensive to make because the EPA bases emissions requirements on wheelbase. It's a lot more expensive to make a small truck meet new emissions requirements than a "big" midsize truck. The cost is in powertrain development, not the truck platform itself. Maybe someone could do an electric only compact truck but range, towing and payload would be a massive challenge, IE very expensive too."
---- Posted by: Brick | Oct 18, 2017 5:16:34 PM

Again false, because GM's already making cars that size that meet emissions requirements. Remember, a compact truck is not intended to be a massive powerhouse able to tow 10,000 pounds, they're meant for true, LIGHT duty as hobby and DIY haulers, not so-called "real work." A 500# load limit (plus driver and passengers) doesn't have to be 23 feet long and weigh 6000#.

the business conditions that existed in the 1970s when compact trucks were the rage just don't exist anymore.

@roadwhale

See above: End of discussion. There won't be any "sub-$20k" pickups built -- or imported -- for this market in North America.

The business model doesn't work anymore, as noted many times before, and the interior space and seating falls short of the requirement for 21st century men and women who tip the scales north of 150 lbs and 6 feet in height.

"Simply put, the business conditions that existed in the 1970s when compact trucks like the little Toyota and the little Nissan were the rage, just don't exist anymore. Back then you could build small sedans and coupes on the same line as the small trucks because they were all Front Engine/Rear Drive, body-on-frame vehicles.
"Today all the small cars are unibody FWD cars and share none of the architecture of the little pickups.
"They share very few of the components. Back then you could build pickups from the same parts catalog as the sedans. No more.
"That's why it doesn't work."
---- Posted by: papajim | Oct 18, 2017 7:42:07 PM

Just because you believe that, doesn't make it true. Honda is already proving that there's at least SOME market for a unibody truck and is proving that it doesn't have to be body on frame to do "real work" as long as it is used within its design limitations. The conceit is that ONLY BoF can do "real work."

Most certainly Ford has proven that unibody vans can do "Real Work" as well if not better than the old BoF vans, carrying more by volume and weight with a much lower load floor. The conditions, and market, do exist for a true small truck but they aren't the same market that wants and buys large trucks; they almost never were.

Certain service industries simply don't need a giant truck. Pest control was always a heavy user of the smaller trucks and because of the growth of said pickups, they've reverted now to smaller vans. Problem is, now the aroma (and potential health hazards) of their chemicals are inside the body of the vehicle with them. Smaller trucks like the Strada, Tornado or even something marginally larger like the Santa Cruz would let them put those chemicals in an isolated (and add-on securable) compartment that would be much more efficient and healthy for their employees.

Look, I know you and most of those here on PUTC don't like small trucks; that's perfectly fine because there is a need for trucks of such size. But not everybody, not even half of everybody, wants something that big. The biggest crossovers are very visibly shorter than a full sized truck and ride much lower on average, with the exception of those built body on frame. Those unibody models are also significantly less expensive than those BoF models as well.

There is a need for something truly smaller, and I mean smaller by more than a mere 10% from full sized. A truck with the ride height of an AWD crossover and a loading height no higher than mid-thigh on an average person would be ideal for those people who want an open bed but NOT something so large it could pass as a bus. I actually sit DOWN in my '97 Ranger which is a huge break from having to climb into my previous Wrangler and even that 2WD F-150 I used to own.

I've driven big... possibly even bigger than most people on these boards (not necessarily a pickup truck) and I understand the sense of Power such a vehicle gives you. But damn it I don't LIKE driving big simply because they're so clumsy. They're too wide for some 2-lane roads and a tight squeeze on some four-lane bridges when the other three lanes are occupied. I don't tow so simply don't need the capacity and even if I did tow it would likely be well within the maximum capacity of even the smallest American, so-called 'mid-sized' pickup today. And here's the thing: if I had a small pickup with a modest 5-foot bed, I would never need to tow a tiny utility trailer behind that six-foot empty bed I see so often with full-sized trucks today. I would actually have my load in the bed.

@Roadwhale

It took you six paragraphs to avoid responding to my key point---the cost of building small trucks is almost the same as the cost of building more capable half ton models. You pay no attention to the fact that modern automakers cannot restore the business conditions that existed in 1975.

If you want a small truck go build one!

Buy a clean old Ranger or S10 and spend a few bucks giving it a new lease on life. That works!

Trying to convince automakers to turn their business model upside down for the privilege of selling sub-$20 trucks in the US market is a fool's errand.

You have better things to do with your time (like fixing up an old Ranger)



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