Tweeted: Ram 1500 Getting Pentastar V-6 Next Year

Tweeted: Ram 1500 Getting Pentastar V-6 Next Year

Chrysler's powertrain chief, Paolo Ferrero, has confirmed that the Ram 1500 half-ton pickup will receive the all-new 3.6-liter Pentastar V-6 in 2012, according to a tweet by WardsAuto.

The move isn't unexpected, but it remained unofficial until now.

The Pentastar six-cylinder features aluminum construction for weight savings, dual overhead cams and variable valve timing. It will replace the Ram's 215-horsepower (235 pounds-feet of torque), single-overhead-cam 3.7-liter V-6 that was introduced for the 2002 model year.

Power output varies by application, and it's still unknown how much grunt the compact six will put to the ground in the Ram 1500. The Jeep Grand Cherokee with the 3.6 is rated at 290 hp and 260 pounds-feet of torque, while the Dodge Challenger V-6 is rated at 305 hp and 268 pounds-feet.

Other Pentastar features include torque-activated cam phasers, a standard oil cooler and improved fuel economy. It's likely we'll see Fiat's sophisticated Multi-Air valve timing system added to the engine down the road.

The Pentastar Ram 1500 will compete directly against the Ford F-150 with the new 3.7-liter Duratec V-6, updated 4.0-liter V-6 in the Toyota Tundra and GM's full-size Chevy Silverado 1500 and GMC Sierra 1500 with the ancient 4.3-liter V-6.

[Source: WardsAuto]

Comments

About time Ram does this! Some peoples expectactions are WAY high, if it had the 8 speed I would think with electric power steering 18 city and 24 hwy is possable, would be wise to go to 245/70/17s instead of 265s. And I also totalally think they can make the radiator wider and lower the front of the hood for the future. As far as the V-8 being dead, not quite. As for me I went and bought a 96 Camry 4 cylinder 5 speed for alot of my driving, and maybe use the truck say 20-25% of the time, I can almost double my in town mileage. And use my truck when I need something hauled. Sure can't see trading to get a small in town mileage increase and taking such a hit! Buying a truck with great gas mileage is great if you need a truck, which will do the job of a light pickup just fine.

@TRX4Tom and Sandman- For the time being, the Hemi is just too cheap to replace.
@Emilio- To borrow from Tommy Boy- "I can take a crap in a box, too, and mark it guaranteed. But all you got is a guaranteed piece of crap" You couldn't know of such lofty numbers as fact, unless you worked on the darn thing at CTC, CPG, or NVFEL, and then you'd probably know better than to crow about it.

Mrcrowitall: who ever said the Hemi is a piece of crap?, no, 1, owner, I, know, has, had, any, trouble, with, there, Hemi!, 2 of them even has the warranty for LIFE!, someone, is, confident, about, there, engine!, and what is wrong with having MDS? huh? almost 400h.p and still get 20mpg hyw 15 city, and thats not what the epa says, that, is, what, they, are, getting! with a calculator at the pumps! and the reason it is (cheep) to replace,(inyour words) is that because of VOLUME, and PUSHRODS, and NEW PLANT, not because they are (cheep). I was with one of my friends on a trip, 4 of us and geer, guess what, 21mpghyw cruize set at 65mph,Flat hwy, when in the mountains 18mpg average, not bad, or crap.

@sandman4X4- Wow, I touched that you're so offended by my post. When I used the word "cheap" to describe the Hemi, I was using the literal sense. If I had meant to say what it sounds like you think the term "cheep" means, I would have used phrases like 'old garbage', 'POS', or 'dinosaur frying pan'. That is not what I said. I said cheap, because I meant cheap". You said your self "no big lump of a Hemi over the front wheels, same on the Ram!!! that would be a sweet reg. cab 4X4 short bed! " to which I responded "For the time being, the Hemi is just too cheap to replace". Chrysler simply can't make a business case to replace a good engine, that happens to be one of the cheapest engines they build. Certainly they could follow GM's lead and switch to an aluminum block. Oh- what's with all the commas?

Ok: I stand corrected, the ,,,, were to inply and make effect of my point, I though you were calling the Hemi a piece of crap!, but we know nothing could be farther from the truth. Overall it is a great engine for heavy vehic., but a reg cab short bed,,,,,,,,,

@Dave

You can say RIP to V8 engine lover's but you have to think about that construction companies need V8's for pulling contractors need V8's for pulling also. Not only @Dave but at everyone else Dodge V8's would get better MPG if they would get their heads out of the sixties where MPG didn't matter and Cubic Inch wars was going on. I hate tell everyone but V8's are here to stay and they will never go without a fight mark my words on it. @Hemi lol you can say that the tundra is the best truck put it against the Ram 1500 5.7 liter HEMI and the tundra wouldn't stand a chance same with Ford and Chevy the Big Three can beat any foregin vehicle out their even the trucks with V8 gas guzzlers GM isn't late for the party they were first with Chevy cobalt Dodge was Second with Caliber and then Ford with the Focus. So everybody eat the Big Three's Exhaust smoke.

60 mpg should be possible after 100 years of building these trucks. The "large square area" needs to go.. my '53 was more aerodynamic than anything built since. It had 100 bhp and did everything I needed it to. My '95 is square (ugly) and has 200+ bhp.. way too much. I never run power accessories on it, I prefer manual transmission, roll up windows and non-powered door locks, manual adjusting seats, etc. and I'm disappointed that it only gets 22 city. The '53 got about 12. That could easily have been tripled in 50 years while leaving the hp rating ALONE.
There IS a truck conversion that will get much higher than 60 mpg, it uses a 2 cyl. diesel coupled to an electric drivetrain rather than a transmission.
Manufacturers are AFRAID of the oil companies and want high profits (they make that 40,000 dollar truck for about 15 grand) rather than giving customers what they want, a high mileage, NO FRILLS truck.

I purchased a 2010 hemi 2wdd quad because of the hype with Cylinder deactivation (MDS). My sticker said I would do 14/19 which is what the a v6 regular cab said it would do too, but with half the power. I drove the v6 and the v8 and the comparison in power was scary .. because of huge incentives to go large I did... but frankly I'm disappointed with MDS. I'm at 9k miles and have never done better than 12mpg.

If I could find a comfortatle truck with seating for 5 with a small bed that opens into the cab and maybe some creative storage under the bed, a mere 4000lb of towing and 1000lb payload that could really yield 25mpg i'd consider swapping again.



The comments to this entry are closed.