Canadian Truck King Challenge Goes to Ram


Call this a good week for Ram.

First, does a King of Beasts head-to-head comparison test between the 2013 Ford F-450 Super Duty monster puller and Ram 3500 Heavy Duty, and the Ram wins. Then the Texas Auto Writers Association names the 2014 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel the 2013 Truck of Texas, and now a group of rugged Canadian journalists have given Ram three separate awards: Best Truck Under $45,000 (2014 Ram 1500 Pentastar 4x4), Best Truck Over $45,000 (2014 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel 4x4) and Best Heavy Duty (2014 Ram 2500 6.7-liter Cummins).

The Truck King Challenge fielded 16 competitors for the 2014 event, with eight trucks in the over $45,000 category, five pickups in the under $45,000 and three pickups in the heavy-duty category.

  • Under $45,000: Chevy Silverado 1500 5.3-liter V-8, Ford F-150 3.7-liter V-6, GMC Sierra 1500 5.3-liter V-8, Ram 1500 3.6-liter V-6, Toyota Tacoma 4.0-liter V-6
  • Over $45,000: Chevy Silverado High Country 6.2-liter V-8, Ford F-150 5.0-liter V-8 FX4, Ford F-150 3.5-liter EcoBoost Lariat, GMC Sierra 1500 Denali 6.2-liter V-8, Ram 1500 3.0-liter V-6 EcoDiesel Laramie, Ram 1500 5.7-liter V-8 Laramie, Toyota Tundra 5.7-liter V-8 1794, Toyota Tundra 5.7-liter V-8 Platinum
  • Heavy-Duty: Ford F-350 6.7-liter V-8 TD, GMC Sierra 2500 HD 6.6-liter V-8, Ram 2500 HD 6.7-liter I-6

The multi-test event took place in Kawartha Lakes (light-duty trucks) and London, Ontario (heavy-duty trucks), with an expert panel of five judges making real-world truck evaluations that focused on work capability, fuel consumption and features. The testing included towing an 8,000-pound trailer, carrying 1,800 pounds of payload and subjecting the vehicles to some light off-roading. This was the seventh year of the competition.

We'll have more on the details of the test in the weeks to come.

To read the Ram press release, click here

(Editor's note: This post was corrected Oct. 17 to identify the correct competing trucks.)



2014 Truck King HD 012[5] II



@All1 - I do agree that until there are results posted, the final scores mean little. The most important thing to consider when reading any test is how the testing was done. Final scores mean nothing if your parameters do not match the tests parameters for first place (the truck you will buy).

Still, I find it interesting that the diesel 1/2 ton won.

It matters little since Fiat has had to hold releasing ANY of their VM Motori 3.0 diesels due to non-compliance with USA emissions.
I've read that it will be fixed with an ECU reflash...............

That seems to be the mantra lately covering all of Jeep/Ram/Chrysler/Fiat's problems - they need a reflash.

19,000 Jeep Cherokee's are taking up space waiting for their reflash.

@Mopar Mechanic - how are your computer programing skills?

What many people on this site don't realise is that the greater part of the buying public in the US don't really care much about pickups, V8s and big grilles.

The majority of pickup buyers are buying for the utility that the vehicle can provide. To meet their specific needs.

All of the bickering that goes on here at PUTC doesn't mean a rats ass to most.

How many people out there really care if a pickup can tow 9 000lbs or 9 500lbs? It only means something to someone who has an interest or trying to prove his allegiance to a particular brand is supported or perceived to be better.

Or this particular engine has 2 or 3 more horsepower, who really gives a fu#k.

The same goes for full size vs midsize vs HD. If size and hp was an important factor everyone would be driving around in vehicles equivalent to a F-250 Super Duty dual cab diesel, great truck. But how many really want or need one?

Empty a Ram diesel will perform more than adequately for most middle class American families. Then it can tow 4 tons! and at highway speed limits. That's a pretty large boat or camper.

It has been proven that the average price people are paying for a pickup has outstrip the cost of living by a large margin.

So what does this piece of data suggest? Also pickups have become mainstream family vehicles - station wagon/SUV replacements. Hence the low load capacities and comfort levels of pickups have improved 10 fold. This has occurred here in Australia with our new midsizers.

So people will choose a pickup that costs more and provide them with the features they want. And most don't care if they have 300hp or 400hp. As long as the vehicle they choose performs to their expectations. Expectations take into account, FE, cost of servicing the vehicle, hearsay of reliability, etc. People just don't buy a pickup because of phan boi bull$hit they read on this site.

Cars come in a variety of sizes and prices. Because pickups have started to become more mainstream the people buying them will not think they are at McDonalds buying a burger and upsizing for a dollar is the best. I think with the attitude on this site most who blog are school kids who only just realised that 300 is a larger number than 299 and 300 must equate to better.

I have bought many new vehicles in my life, over half of which are what I describe as mid to high end. I will tell you I just don't look at tow capacity, 0-60 times, load capacity, etc.

I judge a vehicle by its overall performance.

Diesel will find a larger spot in the pickup market than most of you give it credit for.

It's great to be a V8 fan, but be realistic. You guys make up a small part of the vehicle buying public.

V8s will be dead and buried soon unless you have a fantastic job. So, to all of you clueless kids out there the time you spend trolling on PUTC might be better spent studying so you can get a good enough job to buy that future V8 pickup.

@Big Al - @All1 owns an 3.5 Ecoboost F150.

@DeverMike/Paul/Tom Lemon/Greg Baird/TRX4Tom/Dave/Hemi V8/Tom Terrific/sandman 4x4/lautenslager/zveria/Bob/US Truck Driver/Glenn/Jason/Hemi Rampage/smartest truck guy/Maxx/SuperDuty37/Ken/Ron/johnny doe/jim/ALL1 or whoever you want to call yourself.

Quit the crap, really.

It's getting long in the tooth.

You want to debate, but it has to be on your terms.

Learn to debate with good information, then we might be able to have a decent debate.

Opinions are good, but if they are only your view to support the UAW, then how good are they. Look at what you guys have done to Detroit.

Terror tactics (union tactics) don't work on me.

If PUTC wants the UAW or whatever to control this site I suppose it's their decision.

It's not kids like I've been told by PUTC.

They don't seem to care. So this will go on.

As a frequent PUTC visitor, I rarely comment but now I feel the need (after some ignorant comments) to put in my two cents: PEOPLE NEED TO STOP REFERRING TO GM AS GOVERNMENT MOTORS. It's derogatory, misinformed, and it singles out but one automaker. Chrysler received substantial bailout money and where's the praise to the gov't for reviving that company to help put it on the award winning path that it's on today? The main point here is if it weren't for the government bailout in '08, these truck challenges that PUTC puts so much time and effort into would consist of the Jap trucks: Tundra, Titan, Ridgeline (haha), and maybe an F-150. Yes, that's right, even though Ford didn't receive substantial bailout funds, they did in fact receive assistance, as well as lobby for the bailout.

Now I have a separate opinion about GM and the direction the company is taking, but that's another rant. Point is, you blame the gov't when all it did was keep the Midwest employed (from parts and suppliers, to dealerships and steel/aluminum plants). And I'm sure you have your opinion of what the gov't is all about now, but all I'm saying is this is what they did in '08 and this is the result of it. Like it or not, Ram is winning these crowns thanks to the bailout. This is coming from a moderate republican. Y'all need to open your minds, look at the facts, be logical, and leave your bigotry at the door. Every time someone say's "government motors" in reference to GM I will repost this to remind them of the facts, and maybe, just maybe, I can instill reason in these individuals. So if you must speak of "government motors" then I hope you are referring to the Big 3 collectively, because they all had a hand in the pot.

@The Real Lou
Part of my comment is at ALL1. I also know he's a Ford biased guy. But not to the point of being annoying.

But I also was targeting the guys who keep on providing useless input on what they consider makes a truck adequate.

Like I pointed out most of what is written on this site has little to do with actually owning and operating a vehicle.

Yourself and myself and others who blog on this site are mature enough to realise that owning and operating a vehicle isn't about supersizing and the mostest, biggest, largest, etc. This doesn't translate into a better product.

Sometimes vehicles are that competitive it comes down to price.

Like towing, if a vehicle can tow 10 000lbs and the most you tow is a 16' aluminium fishing boat, who really cares. That 10 000lbs tow ability doesn't make you vehicle any better at the task than a mid sizer or even a front wheel drive Camry.

I also pointed out about how data is used by phan boi'ism to justify a belief that the product they support is better, ie, it gets an award.

An award is recognition, it doesn't necessarily make it the best.

I also hoped some of the people actually can look at a product without being one eyed. That's what I like to promote.

A pickup is a pile of metals and plastic with a bit of glass.

It's about good engineering and style, not brand. I don't care about brands.

Ram, the second shortest lasting, behind the Tundra, on the road.

@rationality. Excuse me, but others have opinions too. You seem to be drinking the Obama Koolaid. Consider an alternative if your seemingly closed mind can allow it.

What if, instead of ripping off GM's bondholders and trashing its stock price in 2008, the Congress and their agents had simply allowed the company to reorganize in the bankruptcy courts.

Bondholders (pension plans, mostly) would have gotten fair treatment, stockholders would not have been fleeced to allow the UAW to maintain its awful grip on Michigan, Ohio and Indiana.

Investors would have swooped in to buy the useful assets of the bankrupt firm, with their own money, and those factories and sites would have continued operating. The assets that were no longer competitive would have been shuttered, which is exactly what GM and Chrysler did to those plants and facilities after the government re-organization anyway.

I know good hardworking American families who got truly screwed by the GM reorg. Please don't lecture me or them with your riff. Get informed!

You are right in many regards when comparing an EcoBoost to the Ecodiesel. One engine isn't "better" than the other, they are just different in terms of performance characteristics. If you are going to be doing a lot of towing, say 15%-25% of your total miles, you are probably going to be happier with the Ecodiesel. Towing with a diesel is just a more "relaxing" experience. The engine just loafs along. With a diesel, it's often difficult to tell (acceleration wise) that you are pulling a trailer. With the Ecoboost or any gas engine, the engine is going to sound different, and perform noticeably different when towing. You can hear/feel the "stress" the trailer is imposing on the powertrain. The major difference is when the trucks are NOT pulling a trailer.
An Ecoboost will rocket from 0-60 in 6.6 seconds. No turbo-diesel and ANY truck is going to do that....except maybe the Porsche Cayenne turbo diesel (an SUV). Diesels have higher resale value, with more durable engine components. If you like keeping a truck for 300,000+ miles, diesels are for you and the economics will work in your favor. If you don't tow regularly, value sportscar acceleration, and trade vehicles before they reach 150,000 miles, I'd say stick with gas.

What I can't hardly weight for is the next big thing in truck engines....ETHANOL INJECTION, like Ford's prototype Bobcat engine. That's a total game changer that could spell the deal a death blow to diesel engines. With ethanol injection, you get diesel power, diesel fuel economy, in a FAR less expensive to produce, cleaner burning engine.

NLP, this site has tested the Duramax 2500 regular cab with a 0-60 of 6.6 seconds.

Rationality, Papa jim: somewhere in the middle of both your posts is the truth, as you both have very valid points, and if I may, I have owned all three, Dodge, Chevy, and then finally Ford, and I have to say it has been the Chevys that have given me the best "luck", service or comfort, take your pick, it was only the Ford that was able to carry heavy loads, (reg cab Ecco-Boost 4x4 8' bed) and tow at truly higher than need be speeds, but is still sitting in my driveway because I can not trust it any more, now that it has blown each head gasket! and I do NOT abuse this truck, or any of my trucks, the Chevy on the other hand has been not exactly slow, but steady, with no problems at all, and not just this Chevy but all of them I have owned over the years, and the Dodge Dakota I own, has also given me decent service for the way I use it! and at this point I would buy another Dodge/Ram or Chevy/GMC, without question, I am not so sure about a new Ford though, and just recently the dealer that gave me all the gripe over the head gasket issues has finally come around to do something about my complaints, (Ford did have another dealer fix the truck after numerous phone calls) but the dealer I bought it from and gave me all the trouble about a CAI causing the problem? (I have never had any problems with them before and it was only the dealer and not Ford), But anyway now the dealer has offered me a decent trade for a new F-150! we sat down and went over the numbers for a new F-150 or SD, and seeing as how I do not want a HD truck, and if I did I would wait to get the Ram 2500 w/coils springs if I were t get a HD truck, I asked him for the type of deal I would get for say a new 4x4 Tremor, and if I was to order one, he would give me a decent trade for mine, I have to say the deal is very tempting, as I always like to have a reg cab, and like the idea of a sporty reg cab, so now I have to make up my mind, do I give them another chance?

@ Big AL

I am not totally Ford biased. I have said on this site that I would buy a Ram 2500 with a Cummins if my situation warranted it. I also would like to test drive the new 6.2L Ecotec once it comes out. I am an all around truck enthusiast that is more engine biased than truck biased. At the time I bought my truck in 2011, I test drove all makes that had a truck that was rated over 9k lbs towing since I do that occasionally. I don't do it enough to warrant the extra money for a 3/4 ton since if I got one then I would have to go diesel which is an automatic $7-$8k hit. I went with the Ford Ecoboost because it was the engine that had the most low end torque and the kind of pulling power bellow 3,000 rpm that the other N/A V8s don't get until after 4,500 rpm. I didn't want to reving to the moon when towing and I wanted my torque an just about any place in my power band. The snappy acceleration of the Ecoboost was just a plus. I also looked at how the truck's ride was. Having a soft rear end is fine for most people that don't tow, but you need a stiff rear end so you don't bounce when towing. The F150 at the time beat the others hands down with it's combination of the Ecoboost and suspension feel. When it comes time to buy another truck, I will do the same thing all over again of going out and test all makes and choosing which on is best for me and my wants/needs. If it is a Ford then cool, if it isn't then I am fine with that too.


I would recommend you tow with an Ecoboost. Everything you said about being in low rpm and being relaxed when towing is 100% what the Ecoboost delivers. The Ecodiesel and Ecoboost both have a max peak torque of 420 lb-ft, and there is only 500 rpm difference of when they reach that max peak. The Ecodeisel gets max torque at 2,000 rpm and the Ecoboost at 2,500 rpm. It also stays close max torque from 1,700 rpm all the way to right before it shifts at 5,500 rpm. That is why they say it has a flat torque curve like a diesel. It gets to peak torque very quickly like a diesel and it keeps it there unlike N/A motors that get peak considerably later in the power band and quickly come down afterwards. The plus side that the Ecoboost as over the Ecodiesel is it's extra 125hp to play with. It also has over 25 more hp than the Ecodiesel at the Ecodiesel's peak horspower point at 3,600 rpm. The Ecodiesel is at 240 hp at 3,600 rpm and the Ecoboost is at 275 hp at that same point. The Ecodiesel is the fuel mileage winner though, but that is a given for less power. It's like how the Pentastar gets better fuel mileage than the Hemi. Of course it does, it makes less power.

If you want to see the Ecoboost tow, then this is an unbiased showing. This truck has a 3.73 ratio rear and. I got pissed that the driving accidentally slowed down because he was too busy talking.

This is the 6 speed Tundra 5.7L with 4.30 rear end going up the same hill pulling the same trailer. Notice the rpm difference between the much lower rpm Ecoboost and higher rpm Tundra.

This is my own personal video I recorded about a couple years ago, but finally uploaded it to YouTube to show a forum member. It is a short, but it shows the low end torque pull of gaining speed without needing to down shift or much rpms at all.

@papa jim
The situation of GM was mismanaged. What has occurred can't be altered and we better hope GM can fix it's inherent mismanagement problems.

Between GM management and the UAW I don't hold much hope for GM for anything longer than a decade or so.

GM will have to go the way of Chrysler. Even the UAW will lose its influence as has been occurring over the past 30 years.

Now the UAW are trialling the Euro Union model. Also I see that the Italian auto workers are talking the the UAW to allow the Fiat takeover of Chrysler.

Like I've stated in the past the US has to restructure its vehicle industry. Regulations and barriers have to be gradually lifted so it can transform into a internationally competitive industry.

I'm a fan of turbo and supercharged engines.

Here is a cut and paste on the Land Rover Discovery for 2014 we will be getting. Jag/Rover were a division of Ford when this development work was carried out.

The 3 litre V6 supercharged gas engine will work in a full size truck and replace a 5 litre V8. It's FE is a whopping 17% improvement over the V8. Much better than the 3.5 Eco Boost and you don't have any turbo lag.

I've read that Fiat is looking at a supercharge 2.7 litre Pentastrar for the Ram. That would place it between a larger V6 and V8 for power and torque. But if pickups are lightened performance should be V8 like with a great improvement in FE.


The 2014 Discovery line-up will be an all-V6 affair, with Jaguar Land Rover’s new 3.0-litre supercharged petrol engine replacing the current model’s naturally aspirated 5.0-litre V8.

The V6 – familiar from the new Jaguar F-Type – produces 250kW of power at 6500rpm and 450Nm of torque at 3500-5000rpm, leaving it 26kW/60Nm shy of the V8.

Land Rover’s provisional data suggests the V6 will be roughly 17 per cent more fuel efficient than the V8, quoting combined cycle fuel consumption of 11.5 litres per 100km and average CO2 emissions of 282 grams per kilometre, compared with 13.9L/100km and 324g/km respectively for the V8.

Sandman, Give it another shot. A Tremor would be a cool truck to have..

@Big Al, I am really interested in the Range Rover Vogue diesel-electric power train. 3L V6 diesel hybrid with 340 HP, 516 lb-ft, 0-60 in under 7 seconds, and a COMBINED rating of 44 mpg. That would be an awesome F150 power train. Instead of 320 miles per 25 gallon tank, I would get 1100 miles!

To the RAM fool that keeps saying
More Guts
More Glory
Mose Ass Kicking

The F150 XLT Can still and did pull a heavier load than that RAM Crap truck. You can't tow heavy with mushy Air baggs and a car suspension, by the way, the only save they have is that 8 Speed tranny that helps multiply the Torque to the wheels. The Ecoboost alone puts that POS WHAMMMM to shame in so many other ways. No Guts no Glorry, weak ass kicker!!!!

It seems that the "Truck King" challenge has sent out press releases to virtually everyone in the trucking industry with ZERO information about how they obtained those results. One Canadian Construction Journal said that they would be publishing the test in January.
Seems to be a mickey mouse way of doing things. Sell everyone your results then sell them the test months later.

What? January. Aw thats some bull., why even write an article about this if they aren't even going to publish how they came to their conclusions until January? Moving on......

Don't get your hopes up on this test revealing much.

Lou said it best last year: "The very first Truck King challenge was decent, but they've gotten crappy over the years. I had a hard time finding any decent information on the test."

Lou also said, "The tables look more like a personal preference vote as opposed to concrete unbiased test numbers." So it is probably going to more of the same thing. Just based on votes and not data.

It is true that Ram also won last year, but only with 3 out of the 5 testers. 2 out of the 5 or roughly 40% picked the F-150. I'd like to see data behind a test and not just pick your favorite and number it 1 through 5.

@Mike - amazing what you can find with Google.

I sent the guy at "Truck King" an email asking when the results will be published and he deleted my question from his message board.

I wonder what kind of truck he will be driving over the winter...... most likely on Reid Bigland's expense account.

My last 2 fords both power strokes have given me a lot more trouble than the 2 dodge Cummins ive owned. I realize that the last 2 fords ive owned had all the emissions crap on them which were most of the problems. Exect the 08. It ate radiators like potatoe chips! Does that mean that I should babble about how crappy ford is? Or the 1998 chevy i had that ate 4 clutches in 60,000 miles. I guess gm is crap as well then huh? I'm willing to bet you've never even owned a dodge much less a new 2013 ram. Ram won this and they've won just about every other award this year! I'm sorry that troubles you but sometimes everyone must eat some crow! :-)

If you want a plush ride, get the half ton Ram. If you want a truck that works and has great customer satisfaction scores, get the Chevy or GMC.

If you want a half ton with great resale value get a Tundra or a F150. If you want a half ton that is one or two years old and offers a lot of value for the dollar, get a Titan.

In my area you can find Titans on the deal lots at crazy low prices--they just are trying to sell a truck that's not been updated properly in recent years.

I did not have to conduct some phony baloney "test" to reach those conclusions. I'm going by what other truck owners say about their trucks.

@brandon507 - eating crow is only for those who hype their favorite brand.
I'd rather see Ram in First place for durability at JD Power (Durability survey not lame initial quality survey), or at the top of Vincentric's cost of ownership list, or the top of Consumer Report's reliability list.
Over the last 4 years it has either been Ford F150 or Tundra at the top for 1/2 tons and GMC/Chev has been at the top for HD's.
That is where one's shopping list should start at, not who won a test done by an author that won't release the results unless you buy the story from him.
Ram has won a lot of tests lately which indicates that the products they sell outperform or have more modern features than the competition. That does translate to sales but it doesn't indicate durability.

@Lou bc, (aka) clueless in canada, You sure know so much about Dodge Ram dependability for some one who has never owned one. LMFAO!

Chrysler Group LLC's Ram 1500 pickup has topped Consumer Reports' rankings for full-size pickups.
Consumer Reports also said it is adding the Ram 1500 to its recommended list, based on the reliability of previous versions and the truck's performance in testing.


All trolls aside HEMI V8, personal experience comes into play here. Uncle with 09 ram w/ 45k mi has misfire and rattling suspension. Grandfather with 09 f150 has 135k tight as a drum.

The comments to this entry are closed.