2019 Ram 1500 eTorque: Take a Ride on the Mild Side

IMG_2522

We've seen and driven the all-new 2019 Ram 1500 with the familiar 5.7-liter Hemi V-8 already, and we've gone into considerable depth regarding what's novel about this new half ton. However, we recently got our first chance to get behind the wheel of the new Ram 1500 equipped with the all-new mild-hybrid eTorque powertrain system.

This new power-assist system is woven into both the 3.6-liter Pentastar V-6 (which is standard) and 5.7-liter Hemi V-8 powertrains (Ram will offer both an upgraded Hemi and eTorque Hemi) paired to the eight-speed transmission; the main benefit of the system is a 10 percent gain in fuel economy at a relatively low cost. (For reference, engineers typically spend months, and even years, trying to make improvements in increments of tenths of a percent.)

How eTorque Works

As we reported in January following the 2019 Ram 1500's debut at the 2018 Detroit auto show, eTorque is designated as a mild-hybrid system because its separate electric motor generator never fully powers the vehicle independent of the gasoline powertrain. Instead, it assists the engine the most during acceleration and deceleration as well as helping smooth out shift points between gears. As you might suspect, the system uses complex software programing to strengthen and improve the powertrain "handshake" while coasting and offers a more aggressive brake-energy regeneration program. This gives you an idea of how entwined eTorque is with the transmission and entire driveline.

IMG_2485 copy II

The electric motor generator looks like a simple unit bolted onto the front of the engine where a serpentine belt runs off the crankshaft with two tensioning bars. What you don't see is the compact 12-cell 48-volt battery pack that sits behind the rear seats against the rear cab wall. The eTorque system adds 90 pounds of weight for the V-8 and around 150 pounds for the V-6 (the extra cooling power required for the V-6 explains the extra weight). However, since eTorque is standard on the entry-level V-6, the system doesn't add to the bottom line there. Move up the V-8 and it does. Choosing the conventional Hemi V-8 costs $1,195 and adding eTorque to the Hemi costs an additional $1,450. Ram hopes this pricing structure — which is less than normal price jumps for full hybrid vehicles — will make the system attractive to new and longtime half-ton pickup buyers looking to lower annual fuel costs.

As we see it, whether the cost jump to an V-8 eTorque makes financial sense will depend on how you drive or what you tow. Making your money back in fuel savings over time will likely be difficult and mostly dependent on which state you live in. Also, the biggest benefit of the system is the added torque the battery power offers: an extra 90 pounds-feet for the V-6 and 130 for the V-8.

How It Drives

After driving several Ram 1500s equipped with eTorque drivetrains, we were surprised by how such a relatively simple fuel-saving driveline system can work to provide such a smooth and civilized on-road experience, especially in a full-size pickup. It was if the throttle feel became stronger and more sensitive at the same time while also responding faster to fine-tuned inputs from the driver. While driving the V-6 eTorque over 60 miles of country roads and two-lane paved roads winding through the farmland of Kentucky, we averaged just more than 25 mpg on our trip computer. The V-8 eTorque system yielded 22 mpg over a similar route. In the real world that translates to around 2 or 3 extra mpgs from the mild-hybrid system, which is likely to save between $5 and $10 per fill-up, depending on which tank you have (Ram 1500s offer 23-, 26- and 33-gallon fuel-tank options).

We sampled Ram 1500 pickups ranging in price from just less than $64,000 (Laramie Sport crew-cab 4x4) to just less than $69,000 (Limited crew-cab 4x4). The Hemi V-8 with eTorque was smoother, quieter and just as powerful as the regular Hemi V-8, yet more refined in acceleration, idling, highway driving, pushing around corners and descending long hills. Although the engineers told us brake regeneration on this setup is fairly aggressive, we experienced very little of the pedal or coasting feedback exhibited by some hybrids. If we had a quibble about the system, it was the lack of an information screen or setting that allows the driver to see what's happening with the system, either in battery charging or discharging or how fuel savings are adding up. There should be a dedicated screen (and maybe one for towing or four-wheeling as well) that allows drivers to see the benefits of the system while doing the things they do: commuting, camping, towing, exploring, etc.

Currently the only feedback provided to the driver is a small, three-letter abbreviation (Eco) that appears when the V-8 eTorque engine goes into V-4 mode or the V-6 engine is "coasting." If Ram really wants eTorque to catch on, it needs to promote the system within the truck. Allowing drivers to see what the system is doing and how it's saving fuel seems like a win-win for Ram and consumers — especially since Ram is charging a premium for adding eTorque to the V-8.

We're guessing it will take some time for old-school pickup truck buyers to accept the eTorque system, but once they see and feel the benefits of the smoother-driving mild-hybrid system, it could be a strong selling point for the brand, especially if we see fuel prices spike in the future.

How It Towed

We also had the chance to do some towing with an empty two-horse trailer weighing about 3,500 pounds through the hilly farmland and found the Hemi with eTorque still offered all the low-end torque and confident feel we've come to expect of the Ram 1500. Of course, the towing mirrors, load-leveling suspension, noise-canceling interior, surround-view cameras and massive 12-inch navigation screen didn't hurt either. But we like the how the eTorque system worked to help us tow and make solid and clunk-free shifts while — according the Eco light on the dash — saving some fuel.

Model-year 2019 Ram 1500s equipped with the standard Hemi V-8 and V-8 eTorque are being delivered to dealerships now; however, the Pentastar V-6 eTorque engine (also slated for several Jeep models) will have late 2018 availability.

Cars.com photos by Mark Williams, manufacturer images

IMG_2532 copy II

IMG_2493 copy II

IMG_2496 copy II

IMG_2497 copy II

ET019_004EPaqmt9g059r0mc6ad7brl3602lc copy II

Comments

Its a very interesting idea and system. Intuitively it makes a lot of sense delivering decent performance improvements at modest cost, low added weight, and mild additional complexity. 1 to 3 mpg is pretty irrelevant for a full size truck owner (roughly the difference between most mid size trucks and a full size) but 90 to 130lb ft of torque is a very nice addition in a half ton. I look forward to seeing and hearing more about this and how it compares to others.

I just watched TFL's issue on this and they did a review with both the V6 and V8. He actually liked the V6 for the price and how well it accelerated!

I like the idea a lot. Good job Ram on using the technology. I still am not a fan of the durango/charger front end. I see them in person and they just don't have that commanding presence the old trucks had.

Please stop putting out this "mild" hybrid crap.
We want full range extenders with electric drive.
That is far less complicated and costly and far more reliable and long lasting and efficient.
Oh, I know, it is less profitable for the current profit structure of entrenched part makers and repair earnings.
Well, us brainless consumers are the real ones to blame ultimately.
Yeah, THAT'S YOU, numb skulls!

I ordered a black big horn sport with Etorque, can't wait to get it.

@Ted

your comment is insulting to all concerned. Did you think about your tone before hitting the button.

you seen to believe that there's some kind of fantasy-land where everybody rides bikes, takes buses and drives electric cars and it's all there at the snap of a finger.

think about it. The world's population spent trillions of dollars and spent decades to achieve the current infrastructure and functional environment that allows people the freedom to travel where and when they want.

You offer nothing in the way of specifics.

I ran some numbers a week ago or so, and it was something like 58k miles for the system to pay for itself with $4 gas, and 78k miles to pay for itself with $3 gas. This was with the 5.7 Hemi.

It is probably a worthwhile option if you keep your vehicles past 100k miles, or a hedge against fuel prices.

Longboat it is not just the fuel savings but it actually makes for a better smoother drive.

Please stop putting out this "mild" hybrid crap.
We want full range extenders with electric drive.
That is far less complicated and costly and far more reliable and long lasting and efficient.

Posted by: Ted | Aug 24, 2018 2:50:13 PM

We? I don't know many people begging for an electric truck. A battery with enough capacity to power a half-ton truck capable of towing well over 10k pounds and hauling 2,000+ lbs of cargo in the bed would be huge, heavy, and VERY expensive to replace. The weight of the battery would take up most of the payload capacity unless the whole truck was made of ultra-thin aluminum or carbon fiber, which means less durability, MUCH more expensive trucks, much more expensive body repairs, etc.

Also, reliability would not be any better (probably less so). Electric motors fail all the time, especially it it's sized so it's just enough electric motor to meet the requirements of a half ton truck. It'll run harder and hotter more often. Windings can fail, bearings can fail, the power regulation modules can and will fail, the life of the batteries can be shortened due to heat and discharge cycles, etc.

No thanks, I don't want batteries that take several hours to recharge, cost several thousand dollars to replace, and only offer half the range of a conventional truck towing the same weight.

Who wants an electric truck? I don't want an appliance, I like the throaty sound and smell of burning gasoline when I drive.

Mr. Williams, any clue on how durable the etorque system is? I notice it’s up high so I’m assuming that’s to keep it away from dust and water? I do prefer when the manufacturers put the alternator in that spot. I had to change the alternator on my frontier and it was ridiculous. So I guess my question is, for those of us who keep their trucks closer to ten years or more, what are the chances we’ll be cursing the whole way home from having to purchase the part?

These eTorq systems are pretty cool in that they are a relatively low cost way to get better powertrain dynamics with a minimal weight gain and 10% better mileage.

Unfortunately it seems they add very little acceleration to the mix from the few reviews out so far. The weight gain probably mitigates a bit of added brief low end acceleration somewhat.

Combine this with a small weight loss and no added power to the otherwise solid Hemi and V6 and the performance is good but will probably be thoroughly beaten by the Ford 3.5EB and the GM 6.2L .

That being said, this combination seems to offer a very good performance combined with the best interior in the business , features others don't offer (etorq and air suspension to name a couple...) and arguably the best exterior styling out there depending on your tastes.....

RAM leads the way
Chevy & GMC always behind.

@Andy -- i'm sure it does, but driving characteristics can be very subjective. I was addressing it from a purely economic basis, and being conservative to address unknown risk factors.

If the system proves a bit problematic after warranty expires, and you trade vehicles every two or three years, then it may not be a system you would want. OTOH, if you put a lot of miles on a truck, and fuel prices go up, the system will lilely pay for itself in short order, even if it needs replacing at 150k miles

@Longboat my concern is how long will it last compared to a conventional alternator and how much will the replacement cost? And finally, can I do the swap at home?

Never, never, never buy new technology like this in its first production year. This has the potential to be a huge problem until the bugs are worked out.

If you have to have this at least wait till the second year. The third year would be even better.

I’m still waiting to see someone make an aftermarket crosshair grille for the 2019.

I do prefer when the manufacturers put the alternator in that spot. I had to change the alternator on my frontier and it was ridiculous.

@mls956

It's not exactly like doing an oil change. How many times will you put an alternator in a car or truck? I put over 180k miles on my last Chevy truck. After I sold it died in a wreck still carrying the original alternator.

The Silverado has has a mild hybrid system available for several years, and they offer it at a $500 option, not $1,450 like the Ram...and still hardly sell any of them. I think the Silverado 5.3 V8 with their mild hybrid (e-assist), gets an EPA rated 18 city and 24 hwy in 2wd form, I think the Ram is rated at 17/23. I don't think this is going to be the home run for Ram that some people seem to think it is going to be, and no, Ram is not the first to offer it. I think Ram did a very nice job on their new interior, but I think they are falling behind with their power train lineup...not the Hemi is a bad engine, I think it is a good engine...but it does not compare well to the Ford ecoboost 3.5, or the GM 6.2.

Combine this with a small weight loss and no added power to the otherwise solid Hemi and V6 and the performance is good but will probably be thoroughly beaten by the Ford 3.5EB and the GM 6.2L.
Posted by: Shriker | Aug 24, 2018 6:40:27 PM

The Ram with 3.92's was slower than the 2016 Silverado with the 5.3 and 8-speed. The 2019 Ram will be even heavier yet. Even the 2019 Silverado 5.3 will make the Ram struggle to keep up.

I believe some were thinking that the torque produced by the mild hybrid system was going to create added acceleration when combined with the engine torque. It appears that this system was designed solely for economy.

I believe some were thinking that the torque produced by the mild hybrid system was going to create added acceleration when combined with the engine torque. It appears that this system was designed solely for economy....Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Aug 25, 2018

@GMSRGREAT

The only way I can read it is this: The E-torque system adds enough thrust to a dead-start (pulling away from a stop) that it in fact adds oomph to the acceleration of the 3.6

Without it the stop/start system would not be as undetectable to the driver/passenger. Where does the oomph come from? Regen. It's free (unless you count the added complexity of the regen system). In the case of the 3.6 the boost is standard equipment. With the hemi it adds a few bucks.

Like all hybrids this is a feature that doesn't really offer much to someone who lives in the boonies. While not designed for drag racing it is perfect choice for the 95% of us who have stop lights and traffic to live with.

@ GransforHu

Too many assumptions, not enough fact.

• A battery with enough capacity to power a half-ton truck capable of towing well over 10k pounds and hauling 2,000+ lbs of cargo in the bed would be huge, heavy, and VERY expensive to replace.
--- Partially true. But that also depends on how and where the truck is being used. As a local work truck, a 100kWh battery pack is only marginally heavier than the typical ICE driveline, even when going for 4WD. Meanwhile, you've got torque and to spare for getting that 10K load moving much more quickly than even the biggest pickup truck diesel. The cost of replacement? Hardly more than replacing the engine and/or transmission on that diesel and possibly less, as the current round of batteries by Tesla (enough years on them to get a valid estimate) suggests 15-20 years before needing replacement, even under heavy use.

• Also, reliability would not be any better (probably less so). Electric motors fail all the time, especially it it's sized so it's just enough electric motor to meet the requirements of a half ton truck.
--- What evidence do you have to prove this statement? So far, electric motors in cars have proven remarkably reliable and if you want to talk about loads, keep in mind that railroads have been using electric motors on their axles for 100 years! The locomotives alone weigh hundreds of tons and pull thousands of tons. If electric motors were so susceptible to loads, why are railroads still using them?

• It'll run harder and hotter more often. Windings can fail, bearings can fail, the power regulation modules can and will fail, the life of the batteries can be shortened due to heat and discharge cycles, etc.
--- Anything CAN fail but that doesn't mean they will. If anything, they tend to last longer under heavy use than they do under intermittent use. Electric motors tend to be rated for hundreds of thousands of hours MTBO (Mean Time Between Overhaul.) If the motor is properly sized to the task, the reliability should be far superior to the typical ICE engine/transmission combo. They're not likely to overheat and roller bearings especially last far, far longer than the old ball bearings.

• No thanks, I don't want batteries that take several hours to recharge,...
--- This is your sole argument and even that is somewhat false. I've already addressed the cost of battery replacement and even the range issue is marginal at best unless you consistently drive long distances. As for recharge time, under average conditions, it is literally a non-issue.

The average pickup truck rarely drives more than 100 miles in a day, especially when hauling a 10,000# load. Each day is an out-and-back run to a job site and such a load is usually a one-way trip as that load will remain on the job site for several days, if not permanently if it is construction material. A 100kWh battery pack should be good for no less than 150 miles under load and still be good for nearly 300 miles when empty.

Now, I'll grant that if you're one of these drivers who shuttles other people's cars around on a 3- 5-car trailer then you need longer runs than that. Pickups for that purpose will probably go HFC (Hydrogen Fuel Cell). BUT... those trucks are also one-ton class 350/3500 heavy duty versions of the traditional pickup truck and strangely, it is almost always a Ram truck I see pulling those loads today.

Change is coming, whether you like it or not.

@MLS956 -- if FCA engineers did their due diligence, it should be nearly as reliable as an alternator, save for the extra moving parts and interface. In the event of maintenance, i doubt the whole thing would need replacement. Maybe refreshed batteries after Xx1000 cycles, or possibly a regen unit after 120k.

Probably a great system if you deal with traffic. Not so much out on the ranch. I don't know if it would be worth it if you do lots of cross-country interstate highway miles.

Vulpine you nailed it. Use this truck as intended and life is good. If you intend to trailer a skid loader all day you are driving the wrong truck. Cudos to Chrysler.

Congratulations, this has been the most constructive comments that I have read here in a long time. No bickering and other silly commentes. I enjoyed reading all your comments.

Thank you.

I believe some were thinking that the torque produced by the mild hybrid system was going to create added acceleration when combined with the engine torque. It appears that this system was designed solely for economy.


Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Aug 25, 2018 2:39:31 AM


Its been there done that tech to eek out mileage that the other two already get.

I just drove a 18 silverado lt 4x4. Over 100 miles of freeway and some stop and go traffic, it managed just under 24 mpg. Even with the 6 speed it was very smooth, and pulled nicely when you got on it. Wayyy better than the 5.3’s from 07-13. Explain to me why I would pay extra for this when the v8’s are getting this mileage without it.

If I was ram ID throw it in. They already have big discounts on the 19’s

You would pay extra because you care about he envirnoment and don't want to spew needless carbon into the atmosphere.

As I mentioned earlier, this mild hybrid appears to be tuned for economy in its current application. Ram could offer future versions or tuning that simultaneously combine the low end engine torque with the hybrid system. This might be nothing more selecting a sport mode in the DIC.

This might be nothing more than selecting a sport mode in the DIC.

This additional set up may be a good fit for some. A bigger concern I have is why don’t I see any 19s on the road? I’d change the front if up to me but the rest of the truck still seems like the rest of the truck would sell.

You would pay extra because you care about he envirnoment and don't want to spew needless carbon into the atmosphere.


Posted by: Bob | Aug 25, 2018 5:30:00 PM

If Im gettng the same mileage from a V8 with less complexity, how is that worse for the environment?

I think these mild hybrid systems will gain some acceptance over time. While a 10% improvement in fuel economy may not seem like a lot, it does mean a lot when it comes to meeting federal CAFE fuel economy requirements. I read somewhere that these new 48 volt mild hybrid systems cost around $800 to produce, so they are not terribly expensive. In the end, I think these mild hybrid systems will help keep our beloved V-8's around for a long time. For me personally, I would rather have a V-8 with cylinder deactivation and a mild hybrid, than a 4 cylinder twin turbo powering my pickup. Having said that, I would not pay the $1,450 that Ram is charging for their system, and I might not even pay the $500 that Chevrolet is charging for their system in the 2018 Silverado. Maybe in a few years, but by then, the mild hybrid will probably be standard anyway.

I just drove a 18 silverado lt 4x4. Over 100 miles of freeway and some stop and go traffic, it managed just under 24 mpg. Even with the 6 speed it was very smooth, and pulled nicely when you got on it. Wayyy better than the 5.3’s from 07-13. Explain to me why I would pay extra for this when the v8’s are getting this mileage without it.

@ andrwken

Hey before there! Ecoboost roost will call you a liar bc no GM V8 truck can get better gas mileage than his little gerbil motor. We are lairs. He is so dense and jealous its pathetic!

Glad u liked it. I got great mileage with my 5.3L. Excellent motor. Smooth riding, and shifting. Got excellent mileage with it.

Etorque is a fascinating idea in how it’s implemented. I think the GM system drives the vehicle independently whereas this one provides support for the combustion engine for a brief period. As long as they have worked out the gremlins, it should be a popular option. But I agree with the article, people need to see the benefit laid out for them before they buy in.

You all went off the rails and said that my comment meant that I was advocating full electric trucks.
Well, you thus beautifully proved that I was right in calling you all numb skulls.
A full hybrid as a range extender is not an electric truck. It just has an electric drive.
RANGE EXTENDERS ARE STILL COMBUSTION ENGINE VEHICLES!
Man, you all keep proving your stupidity over and over and over again.
Its the mild hybrids that ruin the whole hybrid name with theri complexity and expense and delicate and high maintenance nature.
Please get brains. For your own sakes if nothing else.

Oh mighty TED!!!! We are not worthy.

"You all went off the rails and said that my comment meant that I was advocating full electric trucks. Well, you thus beautifully proved that I was right in calling you all numb skulls.
A full hybrid as a range extender is not an electric truck. It just has an electric drive. RANGE EXTENDERS ARE STILL COMBUSTION ENGINE VEHICLES! Man, you all keep proving your stupidity over and over and over again.
Its the mild hybrids that ruin the whole hybrid name with theri complexity and expense and delicate and high maintenance nature." ---- Posted by: Ted


Now if only you were right, Ted.

Yes, range extenders are internal combustion ENGINES... but the truck is not driven by that engine UNTIL the battery is depleted. That's the difference between a hybrid and a plug-in. In short, you're using the wrong terminology for what you're trying to say.

Here's the thing: A range-extending engine does not NEED to be installed into the vehicle; it can as easily be carried in a one- or two-wheeled, rigidly-mounted trailer for those times when you need range-extending ability. At least one brand in Europe is already doing this with BEVs by offering rental range extenders attached to the rear of the vehicle.

In a PHEV (Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle), the battery drives the car, the engine charges the battery but may not even start for 35 miles or more. Again, the car isn't an ICEV, it is a BEV where the ICE is along for the ride until it's needed.

What you're trying to describe is what railroads have been using for a century, now. Their locomotives are electric drive but the diesel engine is still the prime mover--without that engine, the locomotive wouldn't move one inch. That's the difference between a Hybrid setup vs a Range Extender.

Ted: Please calm down, sir... you're going to spur a cardiac event.

I just watched TFL's issue on this and they did a review with both the V6 and V8. He actually liked the V6 for the price and how well it accelerated!

I like the idea a lot. Good job Ram on using the technology. I still am not a fan of the durango/charger front end. I see them in person and they just don't have that commanding presence the old trucks had.

Posted by: TNTGMC | Aug 24, 2018 1:30:37 PM

Did you watch all of TFL's videos? If you did you'd have seen this:
Half-Ton 0-60 MPH at a Mile above Sea Level (Colorado)*
Year Make Model 0-60 MPH (sec)
2017 Ford F-150 Raptor SuperCab 4×4 3.5L EB 6.17
2018 Ford F-150 Crew 4×4 3.5L EB 6.60
2015 Ford F-150 SuperCab 4×4 2.7L EB 6.99
2017 Chevy Silverado 1500 Crew 4×4 6.2L 7.03
2015 Chevrolet Silverado DoubleCab 4×4 6.2L 7.46
2014 Chevrolet Silverado Crew 4×4 6.2L 7.71

and........ THIS!!!

eavy Duty 0-60 MPH at a Mile Above Sea Level
Year Make Model 0-60 MPH (sec)
2018 Ford F-350 Crew 4×4 6.7L (4.10 gears) 7.82
2017 Ford F-350 Crew 4×4 6.7L (4.10 gears) 8.02
2015 Ford F-350 Crew 4×4 6.7L (3.73 gears) 8.17
2017 Chevy Silverado 3500 Crew 4×4 6.6L 8.74
2014 Ram 2500 Crew 4×4 6.7L 8.91
2015 GMC Sierra Crew 3500 SRW 4×4 6.6L 9.35

These are "proof and facts" by your own admission!! LOSER!!

@ Ecoboost Roost

WOW!! I struck a nerve. I was referring to the review on the new 19 Sierra. Again you copy and paste what you want to see.

Again, your above sea level. Good win. 70% of the country is below sea level or at sea level, and facts state GM half ton is faster!!!

Everywhere else GM takes the cake with 3/4 ton and 1 ton comparison. Did you not see the past 3 years here on PUTC?? some ones in denial!!

You like to only highlight when Ford wins, which is very little, and its only on TFL in the mountains where turbos succeed. Good job though!! I don't live in mountains, and neither does 250+ million Americans!! You lose again!!....good try though...love that your posting facts instead of nonsense

TNT only 900 ft above sea level

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkER_VbeJ2A

@ Ford Drools

Wow, we have gone over this but you don''t listen. Please step out of your truck bc its makes you not very intelligent. you lose brain cells everyday! You have posted this thing time and time again.

Please seek help and a helmet!

The driver won the race!!

A v6 car could beat a V8 car with beater driver, yet its not faster, do you understand...

@ Ford Drools

Wow, we have gone over this but you don''t listen. Please step out of your truck bc its makes you not very intelligent. you lose brain cells everyday! You have posted this thing time and time again.

Please seek help and a helmet!

The driver won the race!!

A v6 car could beat a V8 car with beater driver, yet its not faster, do you understand...

more excuses like usual

@ drools

That's you! Your lack.of knowledge is very obvious.

You keep.posting same video and ALL agree its driver error. Get your helmet please.

@ tntgmc The fact is the 2.7 ecoboost is faster than the GM 6.2 and you can't stand it. You can rant and call people names and carry on like kid but it will still be a fact.

@ drools

That's you! Your lack.of knowledge is very obvious.

You keep.posting same video and ALL agree its driver error. Get your helmet please.


Posted by: TNTGMC | Aug 28, 2018 3:47:45 PM

More excuses like always!

Kinda like I lost all credibility for you, you hoodwink who spews lies and doesn't post FACTS!! unlike me i post facts here's another fact for you, not once but twice, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkER_VbeJ2A

calling me names isn't going to change the FACT that i drive the most POWERFUL 1/2 ton

@ drools

Helmet please..insert mouth please!

I drive the most powerful V8 half ton. And I hear the beautiful exhaust note! Mine isnt fake coming from speakers

BTW..I'm.lifting here and I asked my buddies who wins this race and even they see it......they say your not too bright!!!!!!

BTW..I'm.lifting here and I asked my buddies who wins this race and even they see it......they say your not too bright!!!!!!


Posted by: TNTGMC | Aug 29, 2018 6:02:43 AM

that explains all your temper tantrums (you hoodwink) you're hooked on roids aren't you, look we can help you and your friends all you have to do is ask



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