2013 Ram 1500 Outdoorsman Unveiled

Ram Outdoorsman 2II

Ram Truck recently announced the continuation of the Ram 1500 Outdoorsman with the new 2013 model lineup.

The Ram Outdoorsman takes all the features most useful to hunters, fishermen, campers and boaters and packages them into a single model. Also, the Outdoorsman combines off-road capability and trailer-towing hardware in one package. Some of the features include:

• Standard Class IV receiver hitch 
• Integrated trailer brake controller with driver adjustability
• Lighted 4- and 7-pin harness plugs that offer multitrailer adaptability
• Heavy-duty cooling, including mechanical/electrical fan and transmission cooler
• Limited-slip differential for improved off-road and towing performance 
• Available trailer-tow mirrors 
• Available backup camera 
• Trailer-sway control
• 3.92:1 axle ratio (4x4 models)
• Extra heavy-duty rear shock absorbers (4x4 models) 

The Ram Outdoorsman was unveiled two years ago, and since then the package has been a popular part of the Ram lineup, and it has helped Ram continuously gain market share over the last two years.

"The Ram Outdoorsman makes both a practical and an emotional connection with outdoor enthusiasts," said Ram President and CEO Fred Diaz. "The Ram team shares our customers' passion for nature and the outdoors. We've designed the Ram Outdoorsman to meet the needs of boaters, campers, hunters and fishermen. 

"By offering Ram truck models that appeal to wide range of buyer needs, we've been able to increase our sales, gain market share and attract new buyers to the brand," he added. 

Ram engineers – many of whom count hunting, fishing, boating and other outdoor pastimes among their hobbies – brought together features that they believe would best meet the practical needs of owners who will frequently use their Ram truck for towing and long, remote trips.

Standard trailer-towing upgrades, interior and exterior convenience and lighting enhancements, off-road-oriented tires and underbody protection are combined with a rugged exterior appearance to highlight this next-gen Ram Outdoorsman. 

For 2013, the Ram 1500 Outdoorsman is available in two cab sizes (Quad and crew) and two RamBox bed lengths (5 feet 7 inches and 6 feet 4 inches). The Outdoorsman will be offered with the 5.7-liter Hemi V-8, backed up with either the carryover six-speed transmission from last year or the all-new eight-speed transmission. Other features we like are the 17-inch alloy wheels, 32-gallon fuel tank, new 7-inch info screen and extra skid plating. 

The 2013 Ram Outdoorsman will be available in black, Black Gold Pearl, bright silver metallic, bright white, Copperhead Pearl, Deep Cherry Red Crystal Pearl, Flame Red, Maximum Steel Metallic, Mineral Gray Metallic, Prairie Pearl, True Blue Pearl and Western Brown Pearl exterior paint. Interior color choices include Black/Diesel Gray or Canyon Brown/Light Frost. Buyers can opt for vinyl flooring for easier cleanup.

Pricing has not been announced, but we expect it to be close to the previous model. We'll be driving the new Ram 1500 next week and should have more detailed videos and driving impressions of several new light-duty Rams by Aug. 24. Stay tuned. 



What five days for this to come out? This story broke last week on the car sites.

I find that if the truck companies are going to offer a package that has increased offroad capacity, they could at least remove the plastic air dam under the bumper or offer a bumper that doesn't hang as low. That is a huge fault I find with the Chevy bumper, tons of plastic at the most vunerable part of the bumper - the lower 1/2.

Doesn't Ram offer this package in 3/4 ton trucks?

Nice looking truck.

Should take more sales away from chebby! Nice optioned package...

Lou: I am suprized at your reaction to a plastic "trick" to guide the air around the truck while lower to the ground for better MPG, I don't know if the Ram dam is quickly removed, but the one on my Z-71 comes of in under 2 min. with 3 screws! it even says you can and should do so when going off-road! it works, and is easy to remove and put back on, and weighs almost nothing! I am willing to bet the Ram engineers have thought of doing it the same way, between that option of either way and having installed a leveling kit I am able to gain a decent amount of ground clearance and still get 20+mpg on the open road.

Soooo, if you don't buy the Outdoorsman package, you are a mall crawler?

not really digging the two tone seats in the current rams with cloth interior hope these at least look better, and its an overall really nice package that'll probly be priced right.

guys read why chrysler has not put direct injection on the pentastar V6 yet. carbon build up. so if you use bad gas and you get carbon build up like a mazda rx8 rotor motor that needs to be zinged out every once in a while it is going to run poor and/or tick and the service engine light will come on for emissions. think about it. you know i read an article about why ford has not put direct injection on the 5.0 and it was a similar thing. one engineer said if you don't get perfect, it isn't right. remember pentastar heads have direct injection incoporated into the heads. faulty design maybe? or maybe not good with port fuel injection or emissions problems. maybe fuel isn't completely burnt. possible reasons just think intelligently, chrysler sucks or rules, all car makers have bugs that need to be worked out, including best selling toyotas for example. oh yeah "we be driving the new ram next week", doesn't that sound a little ghetto in language?

Looks like Blacked-out 20s with Goodyear AT/S tires on it, great job, finally moving past those crappy Wrangler HPs.

Copperhead and Prairie Pearl are interesting sounding colors, hopefully one of them is a nice off-white ala Cool Vanilla.

oh yeah "we be driving the new ram next week", doesn't that sound a little ghetto in language?

Posted by: josh | Aug 15, 2012 5:58:51 PM


Yo werd up Ram, we's git it: yo' trucks is so special dat each trim package iz deserving o' another press conference, press release an' special event ya'll is mad stupid.

I like it- although I hope we see more value packages like the Red Wing edition- cheap ST truck with just enough glitz to make it look sharp. Up here its cost prohibitive to order a truck, so packages that put a selection of great values in dealer lots are appreciated. Not everyone wants a $50k porker. For now I'm really waiting to see the EPA figures for the Hemi/8HP.
@Ken Lyns- if you buy a truck with 20's, then yes, you are a mall crawler.

Looks good, although I think I've never been a fan of black wheels, I like a machined aluminum look.

@sandman4x4 - I was thinking more of the Sierra where the chrome loops down around the driving lights. I would assume that the plastic is removable on those trucks as well. I've seen the lower metal edge with damage, the plastic portion does not clip back on very well. I've rarely ever seen anyone remove the plastic. I find that the Chevy and Sierra bumpers seem to be more prone to damage than the Ford or Ram 1/2 ton bumpers. All of the bumpers on the newer trucks are flimsy.
I think that the truck makers should build a chin spoiler that raises and lowers. That kind of setup would yield improved aerodynamics at a fraction of the cost of an air ride system.

My biggest concern is that plastic does not fare too well in colder climates even if you don't go offroading. I owned a Safari and the plastic clad bumper cracked real bad in -25C (-13F). The last few company trucks my brother drove suffered similar fates in extreme cold with what would be considered an extremely minor impact in warm weather.

- Hmm Would be nice if it had something bigger than 17's as the current outdoorsman just looks to under-tired.

- Two tone is a deal killer for me.

- No leather is a deal killer too.

- If I have a truck with 65 series 20's, and your 18s have 65 series tires, is mine still a mall crawler?

I really like that new grill and bumper setup. Should be a blast to drive with the 8 speed!

@The Common Man- the fact that someone else has smaller tires, does not redeem your tires in any way.
17's are fine- just lever on some bigger rubber- like some 285s, or really cool 255/80s.

Still waiting for an answer: If I have a 2013 Ram with air suspension and the computer figures I have exceeded max load... what will happen?
- Won't start/drive?
- Annoys me with buzzer/warning light for duration of drive?
- Truck tells fiat to void warranty?

@ MrKnowitall Two points:

i) On the current outdoorsman IMHO the 17" wheels looks small even with larger than factory rubber.

ii) IMHO ANY truck with tires that are P rated glorified car/street tire is a mall crawler. If its a Wrangler HP 17" or 20" Wrangler HP or Pirelli POS. 55 or 65 or 70 series... not a real truck tire for anything other than casual duty. I just don't get how if it suddenly goes to a 20".. then oh my its not a real truck. So many a/t m/t 20" LT tires out there...

The (min) wheel size is getting larger primarily due to larger disc brakes. (more power required better brakes) Secondary reason engineers prefer more wheel to tire so they can better fine tune the handling/suspension.

Dodge should have bullbars as an option when buying the new Ram. Its also useful off roading as well as driving over animals.

Most of us in Australia put on of these on when we buy a 4x4 ute or 4x4 Wagons.


Larger wheels roll better (mroe economical).

Larger tyres are better off road.

Larger tyres carry weight better.

Larger tyres provide more sidewall flex and are more comfortable.

Mall Crawler. The most off roading most of these will see is when they drive on the shoulder of a road.

Really glad they are bringing back this trim level, sadly no dealers around here like to get them in stock, hoping that changes in the future. Very glad they are putting in the hemi standard, they used to put in their other crappy V8 standard and you had to upgrade to the hemi as an option.

I have read but have never been able to confirm that the transfer case on the outdoorsman lacks the "auto 4wd" selection option of the other Ram pickups, can anybody confirm this?

Will the outdoorsman model get the air suspension of the lineup? I assume so. If so what are we looking at for maximum ground clearance at the rear diff? Anyone have any idea?

@Big Al: Larger wheels are more economical? Really? Last I checked the bigger tires took more power to turn. They aren't just bigger, heavier as well. The typical 265/70 R17s base Rams get are 31.7 diameter and 40 pounds. The Good Year 275/70 r 17 A/Ts are about a 32.4" tire weighing about 47 pounds. Ford and GM both use the same type tire, but their choice of size has less plys.

I will admitt because mine says "offroad" on it on the TRX4 stickers, it could be a better offroader with a bit more clearance, which the air lift helps with, and yeah, the air damn can be taken off, but it's more then the 3 bolts Sandman has on his. So it takes a bit longer.

But compared to the little midsize trucks (those Mazdas and Tacomas and Frontiers) at least a 5700 watt generator, a 30 gallon air compressor, a 3 ton floor jack, and 7 (seven) 16.5 x 8 RV tires can fit in it, with a bunch of gear in the right rear of the cab, an adult in the left rear, two adults up front. Do that with a little midsize, you will need a trailer, lol! Saving fuel then, right? Yeah! Atleast the truck can hold something in the bed, you wanna play offroad, get a midsizer with a small wheelbase.

@TRX tom I think that he meant that lower profile tires on larger wheels were more economical than larger tires on smaller wheels.

Larger tires are much more useful off road. And generally speaking tires that fit on smaller wheels cost less than those that fit on bigger wheels.

Wider wheels do that not larger.

Ride a bicycle, and tell me.

How can a larger wheel take more power to turn?

A wheel is essentially like an endless lever. The fulcrum at the centre and the load on the edge.

If you need to travel at x metres per second the same amount of energy must be delivered to the edge of the wheel to acheive this irrespective of the wheel's diameter.

When you start playing with wheel diameters you start altering the rpm per meter distance travelled. So in effect what occurs is your vehicle becomes to highly geared.

My little mid size runs 17" 265 70series.

I don't want to start this trivial BS about the performance of a 1/2 ton against a mid size off road. Because you won't win.

I forgot to add the reason why smaller diameter wheels are less economical is the same reason why driving over a curb with a large diameter wheel is easier.

A larger diameter wheel isn't as impeded due to the differences in height variations on a surface.

@Hemi V8
Those "Fiats" only have a 3 litre diesel in them.

I think Ford has done a great job with the name and marketing of these Raptors.

If Ram or Chevs came up with a product that appeals to the customer they would sell as well.

It's pointless saying on product is better than the other when the topic is about sales, not cubic inches or 1/4 miles runs etc.



Sorry big Al from oz but you are completely wrong. Larger wheels, tires, rotors, or any unsprung weight takes more energy to turn and is NOT more economical.

Sorry, Big Al...they're right. Bigger wheels and tires weigh more and take more power to turn. Also: All things being equal, the greater the wheel-to-tire ratio for a given ultimate tire diameter, the more the wheel and tire assembly will weigh. This is why you see little rollerskate wheel/tire combos on econobox cars.

RAM is getting to be as bad as Ford with the money grabbing special option/luxury packages. What is next??? The Bass Pro Shops luxury edition?? Or maybe it will be the pink powder puff Mary Kay Edition???

Or maybe it will be the pink powder puff Mary Kay Edition???

No Bob, The Mary Kay Editions are reserved for the ultimate powder puff brand GMC's and their subrbanite women drivers. They will also have an Avon Denali trim. It will be war at the trailer parks..

Lou:: I'm not sure what it is made of, but I know that even in the winter I have taken it off, and could bend and twist it like a pretzel, and it just wips right back into it's original shape! I am talking about the little air dam undder the front bumper, all you have to do is read an owners manual from 2011, I can't remember what page it's on, but I found it under "driving off road", yea right I said to myself, like what in the he)) are they going to teach me? what I don't already know, dang if they didn't do just that! and it is soooo simple to do!

As for the truck above...looks pretty nice for a Fiat, but that cheesy airdam would get torn to bits if you actually took it anywhere I go wheeling. I realize they did it for aerodynamic/mileage reasons, but you'd think they could sacrifice a bit of that and give the "Outdoorsman" model a bit higher (or more durable) bumper...I don't mean a gay Oxi-wannabe-baja-racer bumper, just something up out of the way a little more...something made of steel that could take a minor brush against a tree and come out scuffed instead of broken to bits.

Not crazy about the black wheels either, but I'm sure you could get other wheels...

@Big Al: In case you missed it, I have said on here before the midsizers generally can OFFROAD better then a full size, maybe not always, but usually. However, the midsizers don't hold much and I didn't buy mine to play around. It does what I need. If I had a midsize I woulda been making more trips or constantly having a trailer behind, which saves no fuel. So I just drive a full size when needed, then drive a car that gets a good deal better mileage then you more expensive diesel does.

On the wheels issue, isn't it a coincedence that both GM and Ford have 30 inch tires on their trucks that get better mileage? Easier to turn them and go to a higher gear ratio (3.42 to 3.08) but then they still have people that want 20" wheels on them, now the truck is so slow to take off. My stock 275/70 R 17 Good Years aren't the best traction tire, but they will carrry a load, so that best for me!

And yes, I agree larger ones are best for offroad. Right now I have a 17x7 wheel. I think it would be better if they made it 17x7.5" I know some can put 285/70 R17s on my wheel, but not recommended. If they can do that, or if others are right and they are actually putting a 20" tire that can offroad on the new ones, a 33" tire, then that would work. Then you can buy a new Ram remove the air dam and pretty much have more clearance then all other full sizers, not counting Raptor, cause it's not made for work anyway, just a high dollar toy!


Hmm Would be nice if it had something bigger than 17's as the current outdoorsman just looks to under-tired. (Put bigger tires on it, simple. bigger rims are worse for off road which is where this truck was designed to go, to the deer lease...)

- Two tone is a deal killer for me. (don't like the FX4?)

- No leather is a deal killer too. (aww...)

- If I have a truck with 65 series 20's, and your 18s have 65 series tires, is mine still a mall crawler?

To answer your question, yes. Mall crawlers are box checking, 20" wheels running around on a street derived tire. Off road you want sidewall, protect the rim, can air down and get a wider foot print when things get sloppy.

Plus tires for 20's are hella expensive and you will loose mpg's same size tire with the larger rims. The 33" bfg ko's for 20's and 17's are with in a couple pounds of each other but looking around a similar wheels in the two sizes weight about 11lbs more for the larger rim. That would be adding 44lbs average to the rotational mass to the truck which is located further from the center point. Someone I saw said it would be like adding 400lbs in to your truck bed after doing the math with rotational mass and weights. More rotational mass equal less power too.

Read this, the best picture example of the difference between street air pressure and airing down and how it make difference on stuck or not.


Besides, all that and no locker? Nice looking truck, I am usually up in the air on Black wheels though those don't look too bad. I am with Ryan though and prefer a machined aluminum wheel, no chrome for sure...

And once again, Chevrolet has nada to compete with Ford and Dodge... What a joke that company has become.

I simply cannot believe how Dodge and Ford have cheapened up their SFA HD trucks. Paper thin low slung control arms that can be broken in half by striking a rock just don't cut it with me. I also have no desire to own a truck that will develop death wobble. I refuse to purchase one of these piles of cow dung. No thank you. I'll stick to my 80's GM, Ford, and Dodge 4x4s with a leaf sprung SFA. I will just keep rebuilding them until they can't be rebuilt anymore. Plenty of support and strength with that design. The same cannot be said for the current offerings from Ford and Dodge.

I like this kind of marketing. This caters to a specific buying crowd, in this case outdoors-man. A huge segment of truck buyers.
WTF, just offering it in the 4-door models only? A regular cab would suit me fine. If I wanted a 4-door I would buy a station wagon like Clark Griswold!

@Jim-"Greg" (aka Tyler,Sierra,Bvonscott), please elaborate. My Super Duty has no such issue. Leaf springs are great for off road however. I'll give you that. Crap ride though. No progressive rates in leafs.. They're as bad (almost) as the torsion bars GM cheaps out on and uses for their HD's but took out of their 1500's for ride comfort..

I do agree that more energy is required to turn more mass or should I say to accelerate. That has nothing to do with diameter of a wheel. Take a forklift wheel they are small in diameter and weigh considerably more than a pickup wheel.

But a larger diameter wheel is more economical. My ute came with ATs and alloy rims and it doesn't weigh the same as the wheels on TRX4 truck.

Even now tyre manufacturers are working on lighter tyres without affecting tyre performance.

Wider tyres have a bigger impact on fuel economy performance because they present more friction than narrow tyres.

Like I have stated ride a mountain bike then ride a racing bike. That will give you a direct comparison. Racing bike have larger diameter wheels.

Unsprung weight has a bigger effect on the suspension performance of a vehicle than economy.

Tread patttern has an impact.

That fiat black kinda grows on you. Reminds me of that commercial where they drop all those ram pickups in the ocean and they all come out on the other side. Wow, a fiat ram!!

I wonder if anyone who does put larger wheels/tires onto their trucks ever do a calculation to callibrate for the difference in revolutions per mile of travel? or get the speedo recallibrated? If I remember my math, a larger tire will have a greater circumference therefore roatate less. That will equal to a lower distance reading on the speedometer. You do your mpg calculation and it will look like you are burning more fuel. I used to have a truck with larger than stock tires, it was enough to give me a 15% distance reading error. On paper it would look like a drop in mpg.
I used to run wider tires on my 3/4 ton with a similar circumference as my stock tires but ran aluminum rims instead of stock steel. In that case, I never noticed a change in mpg. Do 20 inch tires weigh less than 17 inch tires of the same overall dimension?
A while back the same argument raged over gear ratios. A person did post proof that there was little difference in mpg between tall or short gear ratio's.
Sure, if you put 44's on your truck, or mount agressive tires, it will suck more fuel. I doubt that small changes will do much to mpg. Larger rotational mass will be a bigger problem during start and stop city driving but with highway travel the difference between rotational mass and change in circumference will offset each other.

When I put 35.5 x325x20's BFG's on my truck with 3.92 Gear. It took my off the line acceleration away and hurt my MPG. I installed 4.56 Gears and restored my acceleration and miles per gallon. I did not change the speedo. Its about 5 mph over.

@Hemi V8:

Read Lou's post just above yours... When you changed your gear ratio to 4.56 you effectively lengthened the measured (by your odometer) distance that you traveled per tank. This would've made your mileage calculation reflect greater mileage per tank and hence improved your calculated MPG. I'm not saying the gears didn't help a little (they likely did help a bit), just that the dramatic increase you saw was probably an exaggeration.

Similarly, when you put on the 35s without changing gears, the drop in mileage that you saw was exagerated by the innacurately low odometer readings you were geting (having a greater circumference, a larger tire spins fewer revlutions so your truck "thinks" it hasn't traveled as far as it really has.

You can correct for tire size and/or gearing effects on mileage by adding a multiplier to the calculation equalt to the new tire diameter or new gearing ratio's % difference from the stock tire size or gear ratio...or you could measure your miles traveled using an independant device (GPS/navigation system) and use that number when calculating MPG.

The two ways tire size can affects a vehicle's mileage are changes in final drive ratio (what we were talking about above) and the parasitic losses caused by heavier rolling stock (whether it be wheels or tires) that Big Al clearly doesn not understand.

If you change your tire wheel size and it changes your final drive ratio, it causes the engine to operate at a different RPM than it normally would during cruising and since most vehicles are more or less optimized to operate most efficiently in a given RPM range while the highway, any changes to the final drive ratio will usually adversly affect your mileage.

If you put great big tires on your truck and then change the gear ratio to compensate, the compensating gears will help with efficiency (and keep your odometer and mileage calculations accurate), but it still won't be as good as it was with the stockers because the tires weigh more and cause more parasitic power loss.

If you put bigger wheels on the vehicle but smaller tires (so you keep the outer diameter the same) it will also cause parasitic losses because wheel material is denser than tire material. It will also make your vehicle ride rougher (but it will likely handle a bit better because shorter sidewalls deflect less when cornering).

Your gearing and rolling diameter of a wheel is significant as it dictates when and where and at what speed your engine rpm is when travelling.

Manufacturers do significant testing to determine what diff ratio and gear ratios are in the drive train. The ratios must work in conjunction with the power torque curve of an engine.

That's why gearboxes are gaining more and more gears, this allows the engine to be operating within its "sweet spot" and be at its most economical.

Everyone has driven a vehicle where the gearing just doesn't seem to be in sync with upshifting or down shifting.

I remember the early Datsun mini trucks had an exaggerated jump between 3rd and 4th (top).

@Jason H
I do understand more energy is used to move more mass, basic physics.

But I also know that a larger wheel also reduces rolling resistance, which you don't clearly understand.

Try moving a trolley with little wheels then move the same load with larger diameter wheels of the same width. These are very simple experiments you can do in the back shed.

The changes we are talking about are not huge, but measurable.

Like I stated ride a bicycle with large wheels then ride on of the bikes with little wheels. Then ride a mountain bike with "off road" tyres and then ride the same mountain bike with the "road" tyres at the same pressure.

Narrow larger wheels will reduce reduce energy usage.

Change your off road tyres to light truck tyres that are narrower and even change the rims to fit a larger diameter wheel and change the diff ratio to suit the new diameter tyres and you will increase you fuel economy.

You will have less rolling resistance.

@Big Al

You are correct that (all things being equal) a larger outer diameter of tire will encounter lower rolling resistance than a smaller one, but any benefit gained is directly related to the smoothness of the surface upon which you are rolling.

As the surface becomes smoother, the benefit from having a larger wheel becomes less (and roads are pretty smooth) so any mileage benefit from the decrease in rolling resistance is more than outweighed by the parasitic losses from the increase in wheel/tire mass.

@Jason H
The increase in rolling resistance with wider tyres is due to the deformation at the base, ie the tyre is flat on the bottom over a larger area.

Tread pattern etc does play a minor role in increasing the rolling resistance.

Low profile tyres are generally unsuitable for heavy work and off roading as they don't offer adequate protection, unless perfect roads could be built.

But we have to remember some people like to have boulevarde cruisers. It takes many types to make up the world.

The comments to this entry are closed.