Ram Releases Tow Ratings for 2014 Ram 1500 Gas and Diesel V-6

21 Red Ram II

By Aaron Bragman

Ram has fired the latest shot in the ongoing trailer tow ratings wars, releasing the latest specs for its new 2014 Pentastar and EcoDiesel V-6 pickup trucks.

The 2014 Ram 1500 equipped with the Pentastar 3.6-liter V-6 will now receive a maximum tow rating of 7,450 pounds, thanks in large part to the addition of a stronger parking gear in the standard TorqueFlite eight-speed transmission. Ram claims the Pentastar-equipped 1500 pickup is now best in class for towing capacity. By comparison, the 2014 Chevy Silverado 4.3-liter V-6 can tow 7,200 pounds, and the Ford F-150 3.7-liter V-6 can pull 6,950 pounds.

If you're interested in V-8 grunt with better-than-V-6 fuel economy, you'll want the EcoDiesel 3.0-liter V-6 which, when dropped into the 4x2 long-bed Ram 1500, will be rated to tow 9,200 pounds. Ram says that this approaches the V-8 capabilities of competitor pickups, but will deliver much better than 25 mpg on the highway, beating the current fuel economy champ — Ram's own Pentastar V-6/eight-speed combination.

Of course, tow ratings being what they are with none of half-ton makers fully adhering to the Society of Automotive Engineers' J2807 towing standards (Toyota being the only exception), expect Ford and GM to come up with magic improvements to bolster their own numbers in the coming months as the game of one-upmanship continues.



What about mpgs? I am looking at 30 miles per gallon highway 24 city.

Why adhere to the J2807 standards when it's not regulated. Until it is regulated, there's plenty of magic spring dust in the bag to be had.

I talked to a guy with some insides at the Dodge dealer, he said the Deisel 4x2 is going to be rated for 32MPG highway which would be great but will have to see it to believe it.

Where's the EPA certified numbers?

So the Ecodiesel will have a tow capicity of around ~6,000 pounds in a quad cab short box 4x4. That tow capacity is competitive to mid size trucks and the Raptor.

The 5.7 Hemi/8 speed is still the best all around package for the Ram guys.

No, the diesel won't be affected by the added weight of a bigger cab and 4x4 like a gas engine, I would think the Crew Cab will be over 8,500K.


I think you are sorely mistaken. There is not 3,200 pounds of curb weight difference between a quad 4x4 and a reg 4x2. I would expect approx 8600-8800 pounds towing in the configuration you mentioned. More than enough for 98% of people out there. There is only about 200-300 pounds towing difference between a 5.7 Hemi 6 speed 4x2 reg cab and a 5.7 Hemi 4x4 quad cab depending on trim level.

@ Hank regardless of how it "affects" the diesel engine, the limiting factor for Ram is its GVWR. As we saw in the shootout the 5.7 hemi had a "calculated" towing of 8,350 pounds. I will stand by my ~6,000 pound towing in a crew short box 4x4 ecodiesel.


Oh so now it is Crew, not Quad? How do you know they didn't raise the GVWR for the diesel? They just raised it for the 6 cylinder.......so in Crew Cab maybe a couple hundred pounds less, still in the 8,000+ pound range depending on trim level.

7450 pounds is exaggerated for the pentastar. Maybe on flat ground at sea level it's ok but I'm sure it will have a lot of trouble going up hills.

Bill thats why its the limit, should never buy any truck and expect to tow everyday at the trucks limit.

Still no where near the Ecoboost.

So John gets to make his own figures up. I will state my speculation as opinion and not fact. I bet the lowest of the towing figures on the diesel won't go below 8,000 lbs. 6,000 would be a joke on a full-size with a diesel.

They are used in the Wrangler, could not pull a skin off a pudding. 3 litre diesel vastly better engine.


Just so you know, the Supercrew Raptor has a tow rating of 8000 lbs. The supercab is 6000 lbs.

let's stop picking on John. he gave his justification for his figures. It doesn't surprise me to see the ratings down a bit from the Hemi since it is giving up 155 horsepower.

At least it appears it will be capable of towing most loads that a 1/2 ton owner is likely to pull and it should get really good mpg's both empty and under load.

there should be a lot of snowbirds and RV'ers that will be really happy to have adequate power to tow and will be able to boost mpg's all while having a less expensive tow rig.

As I have stated probably 30-40 times now if Ram had the payload of the GM trucks with the coils and small diesel they'd have my money. I may have to wait for a refresh in 2015.

@ Howam00

Let's not stop picking on John John. He's posting obvious nonsense that he has absolutely has *not* given any rational justification for. He's another troll just like the many others polluting this website.

I think the Pentastar can move that much weight. It might slow it down considerably, but it will move it.

The diesel will definitely move the 9 200lbs much easier than the Pentastar can move 7 450lbs. I think the drivetrain components are a limiting factor. But the manufacturers magic tow dust helps.

I think the tow limits set by the manufacturer have less to do with safety than how far they are prepared to push their vehicle before they break. It's a bit of a gamble.

The reality is how many people actually do tow to those limits as a percentage of vehicles sold.

I've stated this before, a higher tow limit doesn't necessarily mean that the vehicle is better at towing than a pickup that has a lower tow limit.

A Hemi powered Grand Cherokee has a 7 600lb tow limit, but I would think the Pentastar Ram is a better and safer tow vehicle even though it has a lower tow limit.

Even if the Hemi V8 Ram has a higher tow limit and I towed a fair amount I would still buy the diesel. The diesel's FE towing will be nearly half of the Hemi V8,s and even the Pentastar's.

A utes, tow capacity in Australia isn't affected by the vehicles configuration ie, single, extra, dual cab or 4x4.

The only impact the vehicle's configuration has is on the vehicles actual load in the bed. That means my dual cab BT50 4x4 can only be loaded to 1 100kgs not the near on 1 300kgs a 2WD single cab can carry.

The impact on tow weight doesn't exist, if a vehicle is designed to tow 3 500kgs it isn't impacted by the vehicles configuration. The only figure that impacts your tow limit is how much you put into the bed.

This could cause the drawbar weight to overload your rear suspension. So when towing with my ute, the 1 100kg bed load is reduced by the drawbar weight of 350kgs.

Also, if a ute has a smaller engine option it can still carry the same (and even more) as the larger vehicle, because the vehicle isn't any different than the larger engine version. But, it's tow limit is reduced because of drivetrain differences.

In some instances the smaller engined ute has a larger payload than the larger engine ute, because the drivetrain is lighter. It seems our loads and tow limits are more biased towards the suspension/chassis loads than in the US. We still can tow more with a larger engine, but our tow variation's between engine configuration isn't as large.

@ Big Al

I think you meant to say the Diesel's FE will be 2x that of the Hemi or Pentastar.

So, basically you get 14% less towing capacity (10450 vs 9200), with 33%+ better fuel economy (21-28+).

Seems like a reasonable tradeoff.

A lot better than the gas V6, where you give up 40% of your towing capacity for a 10% or 19%(HFE) increase in fuel economy.

Sure, the gas V6 is less to purchase initially, but when it comes time to sell the truck I doubt the resale on the V6 will be nearly as good as the Hemi or diesel, so should more-or-less balance itself out.

Big G@y Al from Oz Go play little trucks and diesel else where, because only 5% of the people here care to give a flying crap you US hateing prick!

Big G@y Al from Oz Theme song http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmGEvrqxq3U


You wrote:
there should be a lot of snowbirds and RV'ers that will be really happy to have adequate power to tow and will be able to boost mpg's all while having a less expensive tow rig.

In a nutshell this is it. I don't need to tow 9k.
I have a 3k boat and a 2k camper and I would like a vehicle that I can drive everyday and tow my fun toys.
Instead of having car and truck I can get rid of them and just drive this everyday to work and use it tow on the weekends.

The J2807 standards are the result of extensive research and testing by the SAE and all pickup manufacturers had insight into the development of the standards. Ram changes it's trucks towing capacities like a girl changes clothes. They're just pulling high numbers out of their ass and comming up with some lame reason for it, and sometimes no reason at all. It's all about which automaker can try to come up with a bigger number. You think the Ram dually that is rated at 30k towing capacity is structurally and mechanically more capable than an F-Series rates at 24,700? Well it isn't. Ram bragged about how they upgraded to a 50,000 Psi tensile strength frame, yet Ford has used a 50K Psi frame with 8 crossmembers for years in the F-450. Think the Ram has a more capable transmissin? The six speed in the Ford actually uses stronger cogs and components, and better cooling. Which is why the Aisin A569RC's torque capacity is 850 foot pounds, The Ford Torqshift's torque capacity is 1,400 ft-lbs. By the way Bob, the towing capacity is one which the truck SHOULD be able to pull on a regular basis. RV's and work trucks are often at max GVW every time they travel. Any HD truck can tow even 55 thousand pounds on rare occasions and go away unscathed.

@RalphDM: Excellent points. The article states "thanks in large part to the addition of a stronger parking gear in the standard TorqueFlite eight-speed transmission". This is exactly what the J2807 standard was designed to do, which is find a structural weakness or limiting factor in a vehicle's towing capacity.

Just to be clear, RAM has still not complied.

I'd like to see an in depth article about the J2807 standard, explaining what went into it and the main goal of it.

"It doesn't surprise me to see the ratings down a bit from the Hemi since it is giving up 155 horsepower."

This little 3.0L essentially has the same power/torque as my 2500, MY 2001 5.9L Cummins when it was stock. It was rated to pull around 12,500 lbs when properly equipped. Its not the power, its the suspension and chassis that is limiting RAM's 1500. But, that doesn't surprise me as RAM is strictly following there half-ton vs. HD trucks formula. I thought RAM would be closer to Fords max tow ratings. I suppose if they really want to compete with Ford and GM they have to step up their game in the payload and tow rating catergories.

Too chickensh!t to adhere to J2807, Fiat should call these "faux" ratings... .


I do not think anybody would put a tranny in a truck at it's max torque rating http://www.dieselhub.com/trans/Aisin-AS69RC.html. I would guess it is probably at least 950lb ft of torque.

Payload is the most limiting factor for towing so John is about right at 6000 lbs. 9000 is only the best possible scenario properly equipped, and you tow by yourself, you weigh 150 lbs or less and have no cargo, tools, or equipment or passengers. I knew this diesel would not be for heavy towing. The Hemi is the still the best deal for Ram fans. It takes over 200,000 miles to break even.

you know if all you guys want to tow the hell with the 150's or the 1500's buy a truck you can tow anything with and thats the ram 3500 with the cummins ford and chevy only dream of towing the much

@Dav, Unlike Toy 0 TA, if I need more towing I can get a diesel 1500, Hemi v8, Cummins 2500, 6.4L Hemi , 3500, 4500, 5500. You are stuck with your 1500 Toy 0 ta. lol

Believe it or not I had Mazda's Australia's engineer come to visit me this week talking pickups.

He is basically the BT50s Australia's man. We were discussing the issues involved with tow ratings here and how Ford's Ranger and the Mazda BT50 could find another 350lbs towing ability to match GM's Colorado when it was released here.

Ford/Mazda had a slight redesign at the rear of the chassis, by altering the cross members to gain the extra 350lbs. The suspension and brakes were within engineering limits to manage the increase load.

We also discussed the Nissan Navara cracking chassis, but the Nissan problem is due to airbag fitment. What occur an area of stress is created directly above the airbag and to the end of the leaves on the springs. In other words the load is localised and not spread over a greater length of the chassis.

Using airbags on a suspension sort of creates a bow and arrow effect where the chassis is the bow the springs are the string and the airbag is the arrow.

After a while the arrow lets go, or the chassis fractures above the airbag. So I wonder if Ram will have fracturing chassis's from the airbag setup.

What surprised me was the delineation between the way Mazda and Ford engineering operated. Hiroshima and Dearborn have two different methods of managing engineering. My job working in aviation we have similar logistics and engineering support.

With Ford nothing can happen until Dearborn gives the okay. Whereas Mazda allows the Australian Mazda engineers to deal directly with the factory for changes.

He gave me a bullbar modification kit to install on my pickup. Mazda used Fords engineered mounting system and it was substandard. Ford will not see the modification kit for some time, because of red tape. But they will eventually get it.

So, as you can see tow limits are engineered to a degree, but I think the market and competition is driving the manufacturers to make some big decisions.

Why didn't Ford and Mazda design the Ranger/BT50 to tow the 3.5 tonne load initially? So is this design change really the best solution?

I suppose Ford and Mazda will find out, when and even if there are chassis issues.

Interesting, I hadn't seen that page before.

I got the info from the Aisin Japanese website, and used Bing translator, and then converted the listed max Nm rating to Lb-ft

@Ralph DM

Ford and GM make up their tow ratings *at least* as much as RAM. Cut your B.S. partisan trolling. Nobody wants to hear it.

My name is Big G@y Al from Oz I got together with my BT50s Australia's man boy friend this weekend we talked bout the poor back seat room for when we need each other, wished I had a US Full size truck with more real world numbers then our small over talked trucks from down under hehe. I love you BT50s Australia's man you're my nnew hubby love Big G@y Al from Oz!

@Big Al from Oz, ZOOM! ZOOM!

What is limiting the EcoDiesel is the rear gear. The EcoDiesel is only offered with 3.21 and 3.55 gears. If you look at a Hemi's max towing with the same setup it is actually 150 lbs less then the EcoDiesel.

RegCab Long box 3.55 4x2 EcoDiesel max tow; 9200

RegCab Long box 3.55 4x2 Hemi max tow; 9050

BTW the payload on those vehicles is 1700+lbs. Which is more then enough to tow 9000lbs.

If the EcoDiesel came with a 3.92 ratio like the Hemi, it's towing would probably be around 10,650lbs.

I'm glad Ram actually has realistic GVWR numbers. Some other manufacturers, namely ford, as their trucks get heavier, somehow (without changes to suspension) the GVWR also goes up. Logic and math tell me that shouldn't happen unless you are tying to pull wool over a fanboi's eyes.

-Ram GVWR for a 4x2 lighter V6 truck is 6600 to 6800lbs depending on configuration;
-Ram GVWR for a 4x2 heavier V8 truck is 6600 to 6800lbs depending on configuration;
-Ford GVWR for a 4x2 lighter NA V6 is 6700 to 6800lbs depending on configuration
-Ford GVWR for a 4x2 heavier Turbo v6 or V8s is 7050 to 7550lbs (How did that happen with no suspension changes?)

The Turbo V6 and V8s weigh more then the NA V6, yet somehow, even with no suspension changes, the GVWR goes up 300lbs to 700lbs. Fords heaviest engine somehow manages to boost GVWR close to 500lbs. WHAT!!!

Ram's GVWR even stays the same when 4x4 is added 6600 to 6800lbs. But what does the Ford do when 4x4 is added? The GVWR goes up even more! 6900 to 6950 depending on configuration for the lighter v6 4x4 and 7200 to 7700 for the heavier engines 4x4!!! Once again the heaviest engine boosts GVWR close to 500lbs.

Get real Ford, not fooling this guy. It is stuff like this is why ford didn't meet the new tow standards in 2011 like they said they would. Because their trucks would have been so de-rated (about 400 to 550lbs less of GVWR on most 4x4s by my calculations and up to 900lbs in some).

Can you imagine the bad press Ford would have gotten by if they had to de-rate some of their trucks by 900lbs. What is even worse is the GVWR numbers I posted for ford don't even include the laughably overrated max tow/haul options.

"expect Ford and GM to come up with magic improvements to bolster their own numbers in the coming months as the game of one-upmanship continues."

Ford won't need to. By the time this comes available, Ford will be debuting the new 2015 F-150.

I am shocked that Ram is promoting the tow figures for a REGULAR CAB 8' BED with pictures of a CrewCab short bed. It makes me think they have something to hide. Show the figures for the trucks people actually buy.

"A stronger parking gear". Ha that's rich, what lame reason will Ram come up with next to pull bigger numbers out of their ass.

If a person is too ignorant to realize that Chrysler doesn't give pictures with press releases they probably shouldn't be posting on the internet. The pick shown is provided by PUTC.

At least it is valid reason. When ford did it last it was because, "the engineers looked at the numbers again and found it could tow just a more" then the Ram.

Edmunds and Truck trend found that was a "rich" finding.

You obviously haven't done a google news search or looked at Ram's own website...

Crew Cab Short Bed used to promote Regular Cab 8' bed rating:

The same pic is being used on most articles. PUTC switched it up but still used another Crew Cab short bed.

I hate when they do this. At least use the right pic OR come out with the rating for a truck people will actually buy.

Less than 1% of the general public will buy truck fitted with a Regular Cab and 8' BED. You can't even get one off the lot.

If Ram had the GUTS they would have given the towing figures for a model that sells half way decently AND the fuel economy numbers.

This "better than 25 mpg" talk just gets people's hopes up that it will be better than it acutally is. Greater than 25 will mean 26 mpg.


1) Where in that article does it say, "Above vehicle has 9200 tow rating?" It doesn't, your just pissed because your brian can't figure out how simple marketing works.

2) If you can't figure out how much a CrewCab 4x4 would tow that is an absolute failure of your education. Do some REASEARCH and make a hypothesis.

Ill get you started with a word problem: If an RegularCab 3.55 geared 4x2 Ecodiesel can tow 9200lbs, and a RegularCab 3.55 geared 4x2 Hemi can tow 9050. That means a CrewCab 3.55 4x4 Ecodiesel should be able to tow (Blank) if a CrewCab 3.55 geared Hemi can tow 8600.

A) 8650
B) 8750
C) 8850
D) All of the Above

Now quit acting like an bitter idiot just to try to make it look like Ram is dumb when it is obviously the other way around.

Turdra, Good post & good point. If Ram offers the Ecodiesel with 3.92s or 4.10s like they did in a 2012 1500 HD they will/would have my money in 2014. And they could because the VM 3.0 likes to rev.

Howam00, As stated in 2012 Ram offered a little known option of a 1500 HD. (on the Tradesman) It had the 2500's frame, suspension, axels, brakes & rear with a payload of 3125 & a max tow of 11,500 with 4.10 gears. If they did this again in 2014 with the Ecodiesel.. Lol they would have both our money. BTW the 1500 Tradesman now offers the crew cab same as the HD line so it would be possible in this configuration instead of just the RC. Also surprisingly at least to me you can actually color & option out a Tradesman to be nicely equipped.

@ turdra lol

I thought you were a GM guy?

Believe it or not, I went to visit Mazda's Australia's engineer this week talking pickups.
I assured him that RAM 1500 chassis's won't have any fracturing from the airbag setup, because this setup, pressure points and torque forces are exactly same like on RAM 1500 with coil springs setup made for many years in the row, without any problems.

Let it been said ford seats down and waits for gn and dodge to do there thing and then powww suck on these lollipop that why there the number one truck on america period u can say all u want about you're ram and gn and its always the same thing ford number 1 gm 2 and dodge trolls 3 like always if u dodge boys cantch up to Chevy what makes u think you'll have a chance reaching ford it's like trying reach for star never Gona happend hahaha face people fords America's pickup truck period amen.

Well I guess if it has "Let it been said ford seats down," it must be true!

Well I guess if it has "Let it been said ford seats down," it must be true!

The comments to this entry are closed.