2013 Ram 1500: First Videos

It may look similar to the 2012 model with a quick glance, but the 2013 Ram 1500 is a significantly different, more high-tech beast with substantial mechanical, styling and technological updates. There’s a new eight-speed transmission, Pentastar V-6 engine, air suspension, touch-screen multimedia system and much more. Does it all come together to make the new Ram the segment leader? Watch the videos (above and below) to learn more.

Comments

Suck it Ford bois, You aint got nothing on Ram. Once you get your head out of your Ford dealers pants you will figure it out.LOL You got beat period. Your little V6 Booster aint gunna cut it. Your sorry 5.0 aint getting it done either.LOL.

Better luck in 2014 DORF Kool Aid fan bois. You SUCK!

Hwy miles is only half of the story and I am asking about the 4x4's.

I don't care about the 4x2.

But since you brought it up, Ram's "class leading" 4x2 with 18 mpg in the city requires the Fuel Package with a REGULAR CAB, 4x2, short bed, 3.10 gears, and the hard tonneao cover.

Otherwise it gets the same city mileage as the Ford. I am sure the Hemi 8 speed is is going to have some simular stipulations since they played that game on the Pentastar which was supposed to be class leading and they half-assed it and only got class leading hwy with all of that tech. This is a huge letdown.

@Dave, What does Ford or Chevy have that match the horsepower and fuel efficiency of the legendary Chrysler 5.7 Hemi?
Dave, Since you only care about 4x4's. Ram is the only one to offer the V6 with 4x4 Crew cab.

@WARFISH - can I quote you when Hemi V8 posts his brillaint rebuttal to my last post? ;)

@Dave - engineers/experts have said that MPG gains are going to get exponentially more difficult to obtain. Pickup trucks are basically bricks on wheels. You can try to make it more aerodynamic, but if engineers maximized the shape to minimize drag, it would be too ugly to buy and no longer a pickup truck.
Stoichiometry dictates that there is an optimum combination of fuel and air to create energy. Internal combustion engines are poor devices for harnessing that energy and efficiently converting it to useable force. I believe 18 - 20 percent is average. Diesel contains more "energy" but removing sulphur has reduced that energy and emission systems have consumed the energy advantage to operate those emission systems.

We see multiple examples of attempts to improve efficiency. There haven't been any quantum leaps foreward.
Examples:
Chevy and Ram both use cyclinder de-activation and aren't much better than everyone else's engines.
The EB 3.5 gets marginally better mpg than the (past)competition.
Trucks have gotten lower to the ground and haven't made huge gains - 4x4 versus 4x2 as an example of mpg differences.
Another example is the air ride. Some expected mpg gains but the news posted on this site indicate that mpg will be the same.
Low resistance tires give marginal gains - Dodge's new HFE versus regular truck is an example.
Shuttered grill openings - slight mpg gains
electric steering - slight gains

Eventually we will have to pay more for any gains. Companies have managed to keep current costs of these sytems low. That "free ride" is coming to an end.

We have benefited from these gains. My 1990 p/u weighed less than my current truck and had 115 hp less and got about 5 mpg less. 5 mpg and 115 hp gained over 22 years is a welcome change but isn't a big leap foreward.

I grew up completely unimpressed by the Ram truck. Its build quality, reliability, performance, and fuel economy were all disappointing. (Several members of my maternal family owned various year trucks) I'm hesitant to jump and say this one won't suffer the same faults- it's brand new after all- but I'm cautiously optimistic and from the reviews I've seen so far, I'm impressed. Of course, I'd give it a couple years, but if everything is dandy then, I think I may have to rethink my stance on the Ram.



The comments to this entry are closed.