2014 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel V-6: First Look

Ram 1500 2014 II

At a time when fuel economy and efficiency-directed technology seem to be taking center stage, the 2014 Ram 1500 will be the first half-ton pickup to offer a small turbo-diesel. The rated horsepower and torque numbers are impressive as well, reaching 240 horsepower at 3,600 rpm and 420 pounds-feet of torque at 2,000 rpm.

The high-tech VM Motori-sourced (from Italy) 3.0-liter 24-valve V-6 is the same engine recently offered in the 2013 Jeep Grand Cherokee; it is likely to offer the best city and highway fuel economy of any engine in the segment. Final numbers are not out, but they are likely to be under 30 mpg on the highway and around 23 in the city.

The new diesel engine will offer either 3.23:1 or 3.55:1 ring-and-pinion gears along with the light-duty eight-speed transmission (8HP45) with the rotary dial on the center stack. The 2014 Ram 1500 will continue to offer three engine choices — the 3.0-liter turbo-diesel, the 3.6-liter V-6 and the 5.7-liter V-8 — but the oldest of the engines, the 4.7-liter V-8, will no longer be available.

Among some other interesting changes to the 2014 models, Ram 1500 will offer both front and rear park assist as well as a new type of compressor technology (along with interior humidity sensors) that will make air conditioning a more efficient event (meaning less strain on the engine).

Pricing for the 2014 Ram 1500 starts at $25,295 (including destination); more pricing information will be available later this summer.

For a more detailed look at the new turbo-diesel, click here to see the Ram press release.

For a more detailed look at the changes to the 2014 Ram 1500s, click here.

For a look at an abbreviated specification sheet for the various powertrains, click here.


Ram EcoDiesel logo II

Ram EcoDiesel II

Ram filler II

Ram DEF gauge II



30MPG highway 23 city. thatlldo

I was hoping to see some adjustments made to the coils in the rear to increase the payload. I have afeeling the diesel will be heavier than the hemi which will only lower the overall payload totals.

Still nice to see Ram is goign the route of innovation to try and win over some new converts to the brand.

"The new diesel engine will offer either 3.23:1 or 3.55:1 ring-and-pinion gears along with the light-duty eight-speed transmission (8HP45) "

The 8HP45 is only rated for 370ft/lb diesel torque. It says in the press release the diesel gets the same 8HP70 as the Hemi.

Now if you can get this engine in a ST reg cab 4x4 sb, that will be something! but I suspect this engine will be only for the high $$$ crew cabs, and that will be ashamed! if it is available in the reg cab sb ST? I will be the first one on the block with one! otherwise I will buy a Chevy or Ford just because, Ram wants to cater to the high end buyers.

So let't get this straight, it totally copied the Ecoboost name and marketing. However it cost's $1000 more, requires the most expensive fuel, and makes 120 less HP and the Tq is a push. I'm confused as to how this is the best option. It better make some astounding MPG figures to justify the costs and lack of performance.

Just to clarify, the diesel is a $2800 option over the Hemi, and should cost about $4500 more than the gas V6. Part of the cost is because Chrysler BUYS the 8HP70 from ZF, while they BUILD the smaller 8HP45 in-house. In other words, the extra $2800 is for the engine/aftertreatment, while the rest pays for the transmission.

--Wat -- You are correct, as others have noted. The 3.0L V-6 will use the "bigger" ZF 8-speed. Not the same one used for the Pentastar. We got our info from the spec chart, which is misidentified.

@ Wat Watski- The spec sheet confusingly states that the diesel will come with the smallr 8HP45, but that is incorrect. It also states that the diesel will come with the on-demand t-case (in 4wd models).
@Sandman4x4- the fact that the diesel (assuming the rest in the fact sheet is accurate) comes with the more expensive t-case and regular cabs are built in Saltillo instead of Warren, it doesn't look promising for your configutation, at least not in the first model year.
Personally, I'd love to see the "Ecodiesel" in the 2500- Picture the potential of a 4-corner coil spring Power Wagon with a small, efficient diesel.

Great News!!! This means that GM will bring out a DuraMax for the 1500.

Real Performance look for a Duramax!!!

Matt, you are definetly confused. It will get alot better mileage pulling or not pulling then the Egoboost, last longer because people wont try running 87 octane where it should be 91 in the ecoboost,

Is Ford the first to use the word ECO? Whether they are or not, get used to it.

Oh, it also has a much better trans then the Egoboost. Lol! Don't worry about the horsepower, torque pulls and this will be as low of an rpm as that Phord engine, or lower.


Enjoy your EGO-DIESEL. Friggin TROLL!!!

@Frank: boo hoo hoo, cry cause the Ecoboost will be less popular! Who is the troll? You. Sorry, somebody read and seen the Hemi outpull that Phord "stuff" in the last shootout, just that Mark Williams made sure Ford won!

@Matt - all of the manufacturers have latched onto the "Eco" name. I think it is a stupid label for any engine. Ford Ecoboost, GMC Ecotec, Ram Ecodiesel.
Even my f*#$in" lawn mower has a "green" gas cap.

Who are they kidding?

@Mr Knowitall - I'd like to see this engine used as an intermediate step in the Ram HD's. I've said that it would be a good engine for the Power Wagon.

@howam00 - agreed, guys wanting the diesel will expect greater capacity out of their 1/2 tons.

@sandman4x4 - I am with you, hopefully it isn't tied to more high end trucks.

The icing on the cake will be if the little diesel will run on bio-diesel, that way you would be able to make your own fuel, or at least buy from a more domestic source!


I don't give a rat-ass what ya think brah!!!! The Eco-Boost has way more power and accounts for more than 40% of Ford F150 sales. This EGO-DIESEL will not match it. I guarantee it.

Do you really think that Mark Williams is a Ford guy? You are delusional, typical outcry of a RAM fanboi after seeing his favorite brand lose. RELAX TROLL!!!

If the RAM would have won, I would congratulate them, you however, can not give Ford credit for the Victory.

FYI, the RAM lost hauling 1,200 lbs. That's where it got OWNED. DEAL WITH IT F'KEN TROLL!!

"cause the Ecoboost will be less popular! Who is the troll? "

I will bet anyone here $100 that this diesel will not be more popular than the F-150 with EcoBoost.

The extra cost of the diesel fuel wipes out the better fuel economy.

It costs $4000. more and they didn't say which trim level so it may be $10,000 more.

Maintance and repairs are more.

There's extra interest on the loan.

This diesel is turbo charged and a V6 so you can put the V8 and turbo argument to rest.

The diesel will won't be any more than a niche and the Ecoboost will be mainstream.

Whats in a name? EcoBoost, EcoDiesel, whatever. Remember this is not a baby Cummins, so they had to call it something. VM doesn't have the name recognition that Cummins does. But, from what i hear they make a darn good one. Its a diesel and its what many have wanted in a half ton for a long time. Those that don't will not buy one. I think it should have happened long time ago in the mid-90's when diesel was cheap. Now, all we need to do is wait for GM and Ford (and Nissan maybe) to make their announcements that they have dusted off their little diesels and will shove them in their half tons. Good for Ram for getting the ball rolling

I think it is time for a direct comparison with the Ford Eco-boost.

This is an older pic, but look at Mark Williams' garage. Does this look like a "Ford guy" who makes Ford win? Come on! Stop making excuses and making yourself look foolish.


Who is the troll? You. Sorry, somebody read and seen the Hemi outpull that Phord "stuff" in the last shootout, just that Mark Williams made sure Ford won!
Posted by: TRX 4 Tom | Jun 28, 2013 11:26:40 AM

Tom has taken the lead as top American troll. He's worse than Dave and Frank!

TRD4 Tom is worse than Dave, Frank and Michigan Bob put together!

When we said we wanted fuel efficient SMALL turbo diesels, this is not what we had in mind.

Take it back to the drawing boards, chrapsler. Actually scrap it altogether. You're about 15 years too late for diesel technology.

uhmmm very nice :) but GM as made the first 1500 pickup with a Diesel 5.7 OLd Old OLd model 70's and 6.2L ,6.5 Turbo diesel in 80" 90's

30 MPG

At a time when fuel economy and efficiency-directed technology seem to be taking center stage, the 2014 Ram 1500 will be the first half-ton pickup to offer a small turbo-diesel. The rated horsepower and torque numbers are impressive as well, reaching 240 horsepower at 3,600 rpm and 420 pounds-feet of torque at 2,000 rpm.

Maybe we will see big VM stickers on the back window of these 1500 diesels; similar to how the teenagers throw the big C on the back of the heavy duties.

@Dave -where are you getting your numbers from? "EcoDiesel option priced $2,850 greater than similarly equipped HEMI-powered Ram 1500".
Why don't you tell us how much more expensive Ford's 6.2 boat anchor costs?
That price sits within the average for European SUV's available in the USA.
30 mpg even with pricier diesel and DEF should allow for a payback on the extra investment based on a normal truck lifespan. I'd rather buy this than any hybrid. I also would expect a better life out of this engine than the Ecoboost.
Time will tell.
It will tow more economically that the Ecoboost but when put in a shootout, it will be one more reason for Ram guys to cry foul. A slower revving, lower HP engine will not win too many drag races, and that is the format used by most magazines for testing.
If one looks at the Rumble in the Rockies and the HD shootout, the higher revving but less torque Duramax won. The 8 speed in the Hemi in the current shootout helped but didn't secure a win.
EB3.5 356HP at 5,000, 420 lb/ft at 2,500
Ecodiesel 240HP at 3,600, 420 lb.-ft. at 2,000 rpm
You can have maximum torque without work. Horsepower is equal to the power needed to lift 550 pounds one foot in one second or 33,000 foot-pounds per minute.

In a drag race, my money is on the EB 3.5 but for heavier use like towing or getting into a fishing hole 3 hrs down a gravel road, the Ecodiesel will be better.
If one uses a truck like most people, SUV's with a balcony (hat tip to DM), the Ecoboost will be better since diesels traditionally have not fared well in frequent stop start duty cycles and low load. The Regen cycles will kick in more often decreasing mpg.

Why can't we have a discussion without fanboy opinions entering the picture?

BUT! The Power Wagon cannot sustain of diesel because the winch is located where the turbo is. That's why there are no Cummins P.W's.


$2850 + $1300 for the Hemi = $4000+

$4000 + 5000 for the upper trim = $9000

Take out the extra for the Hemi and it's still $7000 more.

In the United States, diesel hardware costs and fuel prices make that a tough case for a half-ton.

Why is anyone comparing the Ecoboost and Ecodiesel? Two totally different offerings! When Ford put their baby Powerstroke in the 2015's then you can compare! Ecoboost, 5.7 Hemi, 5.3 Ecotech! That's your comparison!

Congratulations again to RAM to be the first one on the market with small diesel truck.

If maintaining these is anything like the VW TDIs, you won't be saving any money. You have large up-front costs. You have high maintenance costs, even if you do it yourself. I'd bet that unusual tools and diagnostics are required.

And whoa to you if one of the big ticket items goes out... such as the injector pump or turbo.

I can't wait to see the first tuner mods on these new VM diesels. I bet we see a medium tune to 300hp and 450 lbs of torque and a high tune version closer to 360 hp and 480-495 lbs of torque. That would about match the HO 5.9 Cummins from the 04-05 era.

I have been wanting a 6.2 gm regular cab since that engine was available, that engine in the red cab would be match made in heaven . Excellent mpgs and the get up and go as muscle car .

But not just gm ,but ford as well have refused to put the bad ass v8s in ANY regular cab ???why????

I hope that this diesel will be available for all ram cabs! But history is not on your side .

I want the 30k style regular cab with the best drive train in the stable possible !!! Is that too much to ask for ?!

@Liam - the turbo is not down low on the Cummins, the intercooler is. It would NOT be hard to relocate it. When Mack first started intercooling their R model trucks, they mounted a hood scoop on the truck similar to what you'd see on a 60's era muscle car.
It is an excuse for Ram since the drivetrain used in a Power Wagon would not hold up to the torque or weigh of Cummins. Along with that, they'd have to go with stiffer springs to counter that extra weight and loose articulation. I've seen plenty of Cummins HD Ram's with aftermarket bumpers and winches mounted in the front. No problems reported.

We were NOT talking about the Cummins but the VM Motori V6 ecodiesel. It is a smaller diesel and the intercooler could be mounted in a different spot. 420 lb/ft of torque and superior fuel consumption would be perfect for a light duty 3/4 ton truck.

Ps I don't feel like saying CAFE is valid argument . If you put a gm or ford 6.2v8 in a rc I feel like he mpg increase would nullify the cafe penalty ?!

Another thing about diesels is their fuel to air ratio is variable. A gas engine is always about 15:1 air to fuel, even at idle. At idle a diesel can be higher then 50:1. So having a diesel sitting around idling isn't that expensive.

Also in the Rockies at high altitudes a turbo diesel/gas will out perform a naturally aspirated engine.

The young guys who only look at peak power and torque figures, you don't realise that you don't drive around using peak power. Peak power and torque figure, actually most figures given by manufacturers are given for people like you. Most of you wouldn't know a hp from a kilojoule. So why is it better to always have the most and biggest. That attitude doesn't make any vehicle better or the size.

Peak torque is used much more frequently in driving situations. That's what diesel 'fans' like.

As for the pricing, it seems in the US vehicles are tipped towards premium packages with diesels, ie more standard options. Reducing options and a manual gearbox will reduce prices.

A six speed manual diesel will perform as good or in some situations better than an auto. As good as autos are this day and age I still prefer a manual in a 4x4 offroading.

Also, I hope Ram doesn't screw the release of the Eco Diesel like have been doing lately with some other releases.

@Dave - you can apply that same logic to any upscale engine. People (most) are not going to see it as a 4,000+ step up from base. A guy wanting a tow motor isn't going to logically say "hmmm - that 3.6 V6 is such a good deal, I'll pass on the turbo diesel." They will cross shop the 5.7 Hemi if they are brand loyal. If one is NOT brand loyal, they will also look at the 5.7 I-Force, the Ford EB3.6 and 6.2 and the GM 5.3 and 6.2.
This is were your logic flushes down the toilet:
From Ford.com (USA)
Ford XLT crew 4x2:
3.7 V6 = 29,345
5.0 V8 = + 1,000
EB 3.5 = + 2,395
6.2 V8 = + 8,055

The VM Motori diesel is well within reach of Ford's EB 3.5 at a 3,395 premium.
The boat anchor 6.2 which is fine for a HD puts that motor in the price range of a diesel HD.

Trim packages are completely separate and where does it say that this will be tied to high end pickups only?
If you want to play that game, I'd rather drop 8,000 for a high end trim ecodiesel Ram then spend 8K on a pig on gas 6.2 boat anchor to power a plain XLT.

If you want to be a Ford hump - at least be logical. That way you can substitute fan for hump.

Ram isn't the first with a small diesel truck.

Small diesel trucks have been around, well, since trucks.

The green for gas used to represent 2 stroke fuel in Australia back in the 70s when I was a kid.

I remember when mowing the lawnmower had green and so did the fuel container. And I do vaguely remember you could buy 2 stroke from a bowser, I might be wrong on that one.

Maybe Ram is going back to the 40s/50s and using air cooled two stroke Fiat engines :)

Now that would turn heads in the pickup world.

@Big Al from Oz - interesting but my lawn mower is a 4 stroke ;)

My point was that stupid advertising executives are making products less credible by hiding behind green jargon.

Lou, You are struggling.

The trim package is entirely the issue because the headline is "best in class fuel economy." They say nothing about towing in the press release. If fuel economy is going to be the selling point, the fuel "economY' savings go out the window if everything costs more. They don't even mention towing once...

The Ram with a diesel will be about $6000.00 more than a nicely equipped XLT EB crewcab or a Hemi 5.7 (in the mid-level trim) or $7000-$8000 more than a Pentastar.

Ram didn't say what trim level would be the starting point, but given the Jeep it is obvious what it will not be.

Quote: "The new EcoDiesel V6 will be the top trim level" - today's Autoweek

Dave is correct. The diesel was only available in the top trim level of GC which jacked-up the price. This Ram will only appeal to people who want the top trim level with a diesel. A small niche like members only jackets and fingerless gloves.

GM is coming around to a twin turbo engine. With GM and Ford both twith twin turbos, it will once again be Ram going in a different direction to be different. Then years later they will be backtracking and left scrambling to catch up.

According to www.ramtrucks.com this engine will be available on Tradesman, SLT, Outdoorsman, Big Horn, Laramie, Laramie Longhorn.


Ac, radio cd/aux , 4wd,pw,pl !!! Then be able to add what ever drive train you want !!!! Having the best drive train is more important to me then having a computer screen tell me that one tire is one psi low !

I might of missed some creature comforts , but you get my point .
This system of truck buying is ass backwards .

@ Lou and @ Big Al

Funny my lawn mower is green too but for other reasons


I think I can argue mine is green in more ways than just the hue of the paint. :)

@Lou and howman00
I think it was a product called BP Zoom we had (2 stroke fuel).

By the mid 70s I don't remember it being around.

Most mowers here are 4 strokes as well now, even a lot of brush cutters, of course with pollution controls :)

@Big Al from Oz
You know exactly what I meant, but you couldn't resist could you? You childish Troll, you won't change, never on topic.

For me, the benefit of this diesel is not just useable power but more important a long range on a tank of fuel.

I work in remote sites where fuel is in short supply or only available an hour away. I've had HD's with tidy tanks but this would be a nice compromise.

I have a 2012 1500 Laramie with 121lts and it can usually get me through a 10/4 shift but not always. The 3.0 would be a breeze to make it through.

The comments to this entry are closed.