Breaking News: Ram EcoDiesel Sets New Mileage Record


The 2014 Ram 1500 4x2 equipped with the V-6 EcoDiesel and eight-speed transmission has been fully tested by the EPA and found to offer 20 mpg in the city and 28 mpg on the highway, with a combined fuel economy rating of 23 mpg — better than any other half-ton or midsize pickup in the U.S. The 4x4 model will have a 19 (city), 27 (highway), and 22 (combined) mpg rating. 

"We are immensely gratified by achieving these milestones," said Bob Lee, Chrysler Group's head of engine, powertrain and electrified propulsion systems engineering, in a statement. "Not only do they confirm our position as an industry leader in powertrain development and truck design, they promise tremendous benefits for our customers."

Ordering for the light-duty diesel — the only diesel engine offered on any new half-ton pickup to date — has been delayed several times but will begin on Feb. 7 at dealerships across the U.S. and Canada. The Ram 1500 now holds the top two spots on the list of the most fuel-efficient pickups sold. The EcoDiesel secured the No. 1 position, and the 1500 equipped with the 3.6-liter V-6 Pentastar gasoline engine earned an EPA 25 mpg highway rating, taking the No. 2 slot.

During our inaugural Annual Physical, which tested several V-6-equipped half-ton and midsize pickups, the Ram 1500 Laramie Longhorn equipped with the EcoDiesel/TorqueFlite eight-speed powertrain achieved a 26.2 mpg average on our test route, which included a combination of city and highway driving. We'll have more on our V-6 Annual Physical soon.

To read the full 2014 Ram 1500 EPA rating press release, click here.



I like this power train I have driven the Jeep SUV,and it was very smooth,the 8 speed redefines this truck segment.GM and Ford must sooner or later make the jump to 8 speeds.It fines the right gear for the situation,hills or straight freeway.I would like to see a 35 gallon tank in the 5.7ft bed, and the 6 ft bed,version.I currently drive the 2013 5.7L,with 8 speed and it is good as it gets,with a tow cap at 10,450,it is just sly of the new Silverado at 11,000 lbs.If Lou (the chief editor from Motor Trend) is correct at 75-80 mph he netted 781 miles out of a 25 gallon tank,thats LA to Amerillo,Tx in less than 2 tank fuels.


"You can't compare break-even point with 3.6 Pentastar people. You have to compare it with 5.7 HEMI or 3.5 EB."

That depends on the gearing if they are comparable or not.

In a 2wd crew cab with a short bed which is the most popular truck configuration in a half ton.

Ram 3.6L Pentastar with a 3.55: Payload-1,737lbs.....Towing-7,350lbs -SLT

Ram 3.0L Ecodiesel with a 3.55: Payload-1,432lbs.....Towing-7,950lbs -SLT

I would say the trucks above compare in the 7,000lb range due to there capability numbers that Ram provides.

I would also say the following trucks compare to an Ecodiesel with a 3.92 gear ratio.

Ram 5.7L Hemi with a 3.21: Payload-1,625lbs.....Towing-8,150lbs -SLT

Ram 5.7L Hemi with a 3.55: Payload-1,625lbs.....Towing-8,800lbs -SLT

Ram 3.0L Ecodiesel with a 3.92: Payload-1,432lbs.....Towing-8,950lbs -SLT

F150 3.5L Ecoboost with a 3.15: Payload-1,750lbs.....Towing-8,500lbs -XLT

Any higher gear ratio in the 5.7L Hemi or 3.5L Ecoboost would far exceed the ratings for the Ecodiesel. For example

Ram 5.7L Hemi with a 3.92: Payload-1,625lbs.....Towing-10,300lbs -SLT

F150 3.5L Ecoboost with a 3.31: Payload-1,750lbs.....Towing-9,400lbs -XLT

F150 3.5L Ecoboost with a 3.55: Payload-1,750lbs.....Towing-9,800lbs -XLT

F150 3.5L Ecoboost with a 3.73: Payload-2,000lbs.....Towing-11,300lbs -XLT w/ max tow

I agree that it isn't good enough, but it is the best available right now. So congrats to Ram! You can't criticize the leader and be willing to forgive the followers. The EcoDiesel has the capability and low-end torque of the Hemi, so just comparing fuel economy to the Pentastar isn't a completely fair comparison. If all you care about is cost of ownership, don't buy a brand new EcoDiesel. Don't even buy a brand new anything. But if you are buying a brand new truck anyway, and you want it to pull about 8,000 lbs. You would be comparing the EcoDiesel to gas V8s. The EcoDiesel makes sense here. If you are driving around a 2002 Silverado 5.3, getting a loan on a brand new EcoDiesel is NOT going to save you money!

Sorry, BETTER low-end torque than the Hemi!

There's a lot of variation in what MPG figures were achieved in various test drives I read of the ecodiesel.

This is what MSN autos said on their first drive review:
Using the instrument cluster mileage readout, we saw 22 mpg at a steady 75 mph and at least 26 mpg poking along at 55 mph.

During mostly off-road testing, the truck returned 18 mpg, which we think is great for a fullsize truck in those conditions

Fox news:
consistently got 28 mpg on the interstates in my 4x4 Crew Cab, and that’s at 65+ mph, not clogging up the right lane at the double-nickel. Overall, I saw a 23 mpg average in the few hundred miles that I covered, with plenty of stop-and-go, city-slicker-style driving in the mix

The car magazine's complete numbers were: 22 mpg combined (18 mpg city, 28 mpg highway) for the rear-wheel drive model, and 19 mpg combined (16 mpg city, 23 mpg highway) for the four-wheel drive model.

Automobilemag:We observed around 17 mpg while crawling up and down the mountainsides

Diesels will almost always beat the epa fuel economy, especially when you get the truck on the highway. Gas motors including turbo's have a hard time meeting the epa fuel economy unless you take your time with them.

Hey Mark, Do a comparison between this and the 3.5 ecoboost.

@zviera - I'm not talking about income. I'm talking about purchasing power. I read a study that put Australia at almost double that of the USA. Canada was IIRC 15% better. That isn't a direct measure of wages. If one spends all of their extra money on health insurance (just an example) they will not have the same purchasing ability of someone with the same income but an employer sponsored health plan.
It is economics on a larger scale.
The USA fares well if one "averages" overall income and purchasing power because the USA has a large number of billionaires. You bell curve the data and remove the top 3-5% and the bottom 3-5% and what is left in the middle sucks.

@TRXTom with the wierd blog name - I was talking to zviera and since we both are Canadian that is an average price for a mid trim truck.
Regardless of the price I cited as an example - many people cannot afford a new truck if one removes incentives, extended loans and sub-prime loans.

It appears that both you and zziora are having issues with my posts.

Boo hoo.

Dear Ram people,

Your website stinks. I just browsed it and found no mention of a diesel engine. That you are offering something that no other manufacturer has available should be front and center on the Ram home page.


IMO the biggest hurdle is:

$45K 1/2 ton Diesel or 47K 3/4 ton Diesel Cummins? I think Cummins is going to win by a wide margin.

I think this is a major reason GM and Ford have not gone this road. If I had to bet, I think the GM mid-sized Deisel will be more of a game changer then this.

I have an issue with your last post, because you have no idea what the Purchasing power in Europe is.
Post the source link and stop backpedal.

Diesel is more expensive. Plus DEF. I think RAM will have a great party until the F150 2.7 ecoboost numbers are out-and people find out it is maybe $1000.00 cheaper, or more.

My prediction FWIW, the 2.7 will work, work brilliantly, and way outsell the eco diesel.

I admire both RAM's and Ford's gutsiness. TOYOTA where are you???

Good job gm,,,and vimi,,,

Aren't Diesel engines built to last longer than there gas counter parts?
Isn't this part of your return on your Diesel investment?

For most customers, the Ram Diesel makes no economic sense. It costs $4500 more than the standard V6, and has an EPA estimated annual fuel cost of $100 more than the non-HFE V-6 Ram.

The Chevy GMC 5.3L EcoTec3 V-8 costs $3,405 less as an option than the Ram Diesel, makes 115 horsepower more (handy when passing on a two-lane road), and costs $1 per week more for fuel, based on EPA annual fuel cost estimates.

Where did you find the info that most pickups where 2wd, i have rarley seen a 2wd pick up and dont understand why people would buy a truck without 4x4 out side of fleet work trucks .

@zierra - did I mention Europe?
Australia is its own country and on its own continent.

lol, Beebe, it's available in a Tradesman.

How about the price of injectors and fuel pump on the direct injected gassers?

@Sandman 4x4: what combo is it you really want? Yeah, quad cab cost more, did you think it would be free?

@Faceless Bob

I will have to agree with you on that. In fact, almost all truck makes websites make it very hard to get specifications on their truck besides Ford, and I am not just saying that because I drive one. By far, Ford and GM's sites are the easiest to get info on by just clicking the "Specs" button up top. That will give any power numbers, towing numbers, capacities, or dimensions you want to know. Trying to do the same on other truck manufacturers takes a lot of clicking and finding. Even then you will not find all the data you are looking for. The worst one is Tundra's website. their website almost made me want to throw my laptop out the window trying to find the info I was looking. Ram's website is a lot better than Toyota's, but it is still hard to find all the info you need with a few clicks.

From the data I see is that the diesel is offering better than 4 cylinder FE, that's a four fitted into a smaller chassis.

It can tow as well as a V8.

What isn't there to like?

I've mentioned that for 4x4ing a diesel is the best choice.

Anywhere where the vehicle under a load it will out perform any other option currently available.

We don't pay $90 000 for a pickup. I'm not out to start a full size vs midsize war again.

We have single cab diesel pickups starting at $18 000 drive away. This is about 50% of the MINIMUM wage. That would be like a pickup in the US selling for $7 800 or Canada for $10 400 driveaway (insurance, rego, etc).

Trying to make direct comparisons is chalk and cheese.

Our mainstream dual cab Japanese pickups in mid trim 4x4 diesel start in the low $30 000 range and go up from there. The $30k to $40k range is the most common for our pickup sales. This is a mid spec diesel dual cab 4x4.

Private sales are very rarely anything other than a midspec dual cab diesel 4x4 in pickups or SUVs here.

In the Australian Outback where I live we are paying $5.20 a gallon for diesel and $4.80 for 91 gasoline.

Our pickup market is more like the US's car market where we have a wider range of product available for the consumer.

You can go out an buy a really nice Amarok, Ranger or BT50 down to a Chinese pickup.

The quality of my BT50 is similar to a Grand Cherokee Limited for bling, fit and finish is Japanese. The reality is the electronic aids in it is quite amazing, it would put some of your full size 4x4 pickups to shame.

But that is not in every pickup, you pay for what you get.

I'm not saying it's better or worse as I'm not trying to start a pissing competition.

Maybe you should come down to Australia, it isn't like Europe or the US. We aren't as heavily taxed as the Canadians either. Our costs are driven by wages, market size, etc.

Another interesting feature is our vehicles in general are more highly blinged in comparison to US vehicles.

Look at what we get in our Euro vehicle compared to the US, you will be surprised.

Next up promaster diesel vs pentstar, if it ever comes out.....

@Big Al from Oz - mr.zvioro gets surprised by anyone who does not worship FCA.

Cant wait to see what the Colorado will offer hoping for like 32 mpg highway

@trx 4 tom
Are you sure it's available on tradesman? It won't let me build it on anything less than an Outdoorsman, and i've read other places that it won't be available on lower models. The cheapest I can build the truck with the ecodiesel is a 2wd quad cab for 37,465 on their website. I bought my quad cab hemi 4x4 in 09 for under 30,000. Direct injection gas is a totally different animal than diesel injectors which run at PSI in the thousands. Diesel injectors are not as reliable/wear out more quickly and probably much more expensive than gas injectors.

I was talking about Europe and Australia first and you replied to my comment mentioning just Australia.
What ever makes you happy then.

Post the source link for Australia and prove this:

"Australians have double the purchasing power of those in the USA".

I know you don't buy Full Size Trucks, because they are very expensive for you.
Please don't compare plastic interior in Japanese car with leather and soft touch panels in Grand Cherokee. I had 2 Japanese cars. Hard plastic everywhere except seats. Reliable btw.

@ALL1: too bad your truck has a combined rating of 18, so obviously your combined driving needs take less fuel then the combined rating, so if you drive the Ecodiesel in the same manner, route, area, it should be higher then 24, maybe 25 combined. Apples to apples, you know? 18 for yours vs. 23.

You talk of towing 8500, with 3.15s? Wow, I bet that's a joy. And if you did that with 87 octane, wouldn't that possibly be hard on the engine? Ok, we beat that dead horse. Bet I bet the performance is better, and the engine will last longer, when you are lugging around at 1500 rpm. With a 6 speed, where gears aren't close. But feel free to be cheap and not care about your engine that is only warrantied until 60,000 miles. Save you some change running 87, because you are cheap.

Diesel? No question, it can lug on that one selection, all day long.

Your tow rating is just a bit OPTIMISTIC, but whatever. Pretty sure a 3.55 geared Ram 3.0 will be alot smoother, even towing what the 3.92 Ram is rated at, then a 3.15 3.31 ecoboost 6 speed. We could compare trans fluid temps, as your six speed with tall gears hunts and overheats, well, if Ford even has a transmission temp exactly. Like Ram does, also engine oil.

Don't you have those Hankooks on your work truck? Yeah. Ford needs all the help getting mileage, so they put on those so called AT Dynomaxs, low rolling resistance, and tiny.

diesel injectors run at pressures 5 to 20 times higher than gas direct injection.

@zviera - you can find the link is a previous post on this site. I am disinclined to do leg work for someone who will not give a rat's ass about the results.

@TRX 4 Tom - why don't you rent an EB3.5 equiped F150 and find out for yourself since car dealerships don't seem to trust you all on your own to drive one.

Yes you can build a Ram 1/2t diesel in any model, the only requirement is on the reg cab, you can only get the diesel with an 8' bed, other than that you can get the diesel in any model you want, the only difference is the price is 4K as a stand alone option on anything lower than the Laramie, and then it is $2,650, in either 4x2 or 4x4, just as long as you buy the model that comes with the Hemi standard, except for the Express and in that you can not get the diesel! or Sport for that matter!

I just did some rough calculations--assuming $3.90 gas and $4.50 diesel which is close to what it costs near me in CA the pentastar vs ecodiesel fuel costs are as follows:

150,000 mile truck life (12,500 miles per year)

21 avg mpg pentastar = $27,857.14 or about $193.45 per month.

26 avg mpg ecodiesel = $25961.54 or about $180.29 per month.

I don't have a solid handle on maintenance difference as I haven't seen the ecodiesel's maintenance schedule but I'd say its a wash.

If you are going to tow get the ecodiesel it will pay for itself in towing fuel economy. If not get the pentastar as the cheaper upfront cost will never get paid for by the diesel.

"you can find the link is a previous post on this site. I am disinclined to do leg work for someone who will not give a rat's ass about the results."

I have checked that previous page and you didn't post the source link LOU.

Are you purposely trolling?

How can we buy something that isn't offered at a market rate? I do think a mid spec V8 dual cab 4x4 whatever brand in Australia would cost about $70 000. That was the price of the Chev/Holden Suburban when offered here (they were about $60k at the time).

How much is a Holden or Ford V8 ute in the US or Canada? Believe it or not if you could get one it would cost over $500 000. So we don't have it to bad for vehicles we don't have in our market.

The same goes for the Amarok, global Ranger/BT50 and on and on. They would be unaffordable in the US/Canada. Because of the barriers. At least we have access to US product.

Hopefully when Canada goes towards the Europeans with a FTA they will have more relaxed 'grey import' regulations.

I think you are either trolling or you just have limited knowledge on this subject. Please don't try and debate something you apparently have little knowledge of.

Good morning.

It's nothing to do with gearing, but torque.
Nobody is gonna pull 8000lb trailer uphill 20mph.
Everybody is gonna compare 3L ecodiesel with 3.5EB and HEMI. 3.6L Pentastar is not in the same league.

I think the fanboi's on this site have problems dealing with people who just don't care about particular brand, country of manufacturer,etc.

I try and be objective, irrespective of brand or where a vehicle is made.

Engineering and design is engineering and design, there is good and bad, in every country.

You are still looking at final drive ratio's to deeply.

I have a 3.73 final drive, but what's my top gearbag ratio? What's my wheel diameter.

What torque am I getting at 1 800rpm and what's my FE to get that torque?

You are talking beyond your knowledge.

A gas engine will move weight, but not as well as a diesel of 75% of the horsepower. Why do you think all heavy transport uses diesel and you will find light commercials in the US will move to diesel as well, ie, Transits, Ducato Ram things, etc.

The VM diesel in the Ram will be a far better option for towing than an Eco Boost.

The Eco Boost will move the weight you are talking about, but with the same or worse FE than a V8.

No matter how much technology that goes into a gasoline engine it will always require a 14.7:1 Fuel/Air ratio.

A diesel can run from 50:1 to 14.7:1 Fuel/Air ratio.

That's why diesel is better for a turbo, you can increase power and torque with less fuel.

This is why my argument for diesel is as it is. Gasoline can never be as efficient as a diesel.

You can spruik diff ratio's all day. But understand where you are coming from.

I bet you didn't even know a gear and wheel assy are levers.

@TRX 4 Tom

"too bad your truck has a combined rating of 18, so obviously your combined driving needs take less fuel then the combined rating, so if you drive the Ecodiesel in the same manner, route, area, it should be higher then 24, maybe 25 combined. Apples to apples, you know? 18 for yours vs. 23. "

Actually no, my company truck, which is an crew cab 2wd with 3.15, returns 19.5-20 mpg combined each tank. I have said this numerous times in numerous articles. Seven other coworkers have the same truck configuration and get the same mileage I do. If you don't believe me then I can talk to my boss to see if I can get a print out from our fuel card bill that shows out mileage. My boss has a 4wd crew cab EB with a 3.31 and he averages 1 mile less combined than I do per his fuel bill records. As far as my personal Ecoboost 4x4 3.73 crew cab truck goes, fuel mileage is not my top priority since I want it's power to pull my toys more than getting great fuel mileage. It returns about 15-16 mpg combined each tank, but what do expect with a truck that is rated to tow 11,300lbs.

"You talk of towing 8500, with 3.15s?"

I have personally towed about 5,500 lbs in my work truck, and there are coworkers that have towed up to 7,000lbs in their work truck with the same 3.15 configuration as mine. I can tell you it will do it a lot easier, with less rpm, and plenty of power to spare than other V8 trucks that I have driven. At 70 mph, it just chugs along at 1,600 rpm. If you don't believe me then it's no skin off my nuts because I am not going to waste my time trying to tell you the truth especially when you will not listen no matter what I say. If you don't want to know the truth and rather be ignorant all your life then there is nothing I can do about it.

"But feel free to be cheap and not care about your engine that is only warrantied until 60,000 miles. Save you some change running 87, because you are cheap."

I have asked you multiple time for you to show me some kind of proof that 87 octane is hurting my truck. Ford says 87 octane will not hurt your truck, but if you want a little more power then add premium. Same thing Ram says about the Hemi, but recommend using 89 instead. All of our work Ecboosts also use 87 only and some have well over a 100K miles. Hell, even did their 9,000lb towing test over the Rockies with the Ecoboost on 87 and 85 octane with no issues. So are you going to call them a liar too? So please, post your proof. I am dying to see it. I mean, you would think if someone had proof then they would have posted it by now.... But no, you are going to continue to have diarrhea of the mouth spouting out assumptions. Please, just post the proof you have so I(we) may see it.

"well, if Ford even has a transmission temp exactly. Like Ram does, also engine oil."

Yes, they do. The exact transmission temp is on the productivity screen, but not the oil temp. The oil temp is coming on the new models. I would think you would know that with all this extensive knowledge you say you have about my truck and how I am hurting it using the octane recommended by the manufacturer......

"Don't you have those Hankooks on your work truck?"

Nope, Goodyear SR-As. As a fortune 500 American company, we take pride in buying American when we can which limits us to Cooper or Goodyear tires since they are the only true American tire companies. That is one reason we could not by Ram's even if we wanted to.

2013 Mazda BT-50 B32Q GT , Manual Trany, the car you have , starts from 54890 A$. Doesn't even have an automatic trany.
In all honesty, this won't sell in here even without any chicken taxes.
Who is trolling now?

Realisticly, they can probably get away with 3.21 gears, not just 3.55 and 3.92, considering the torque is down low, closer to cruising speed then a egoboost, or any gas burner.

They use 3.21s and 3.55s in the Pentastar 3.6, and it likes to rev, so it stands to reason, why not 3.21s when you have max torque at half the rpm of the 3.6 gasser?

There is more out there. Use 3.21s in 2 wheel drive atleast, and smaller tires (Rams tires are the tallest, GM AND.FORD have smaller...just don't use little Hankook Dynomaxs, lol.

Keep in mind, the trucks givin to the press to drive were mostly Larimie Longhorn, just so they could see what all is available on it. Want better mileage? Don't get 3.92 gears and 33" tires, get 265/70 17s and 3.55s and skip the sunroof, console, heated/cooled seats, heated steering wheel, and whatnot, your mileage will get slightly better. Better they put the heavy trucks out there to test, instead of the lighter trucks, so it should be easier for the basic consumer get like mileage.

Since they made a HFE 3.6 L gasser, why not a HFE Ecodiesel? Regular cab, shortbed, 4x2, maybe 245/70 17 tires or 255/65 17s, 3.21 gear. Should be no problem getting 30 at 60 or less.

Speaking of 18 mpg as tested by four wheeler magazine, that's offroad testing, crawling, playing around, They got 14 from a Chevy 4x4 5.3 3.42 geared. That Chevy might have higher tow rating, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that a 3.55 geared or 3.92, Ram with about 35 more ft pounds trq at half the engine rpm, and an 8 speed, will be a much better tower then that Chivy.

The Ram 2500 in four wheelers test with 6.4 hemi, got 10 mpg, alot heavier then both 1500s, not an even comparison.

What happened to the 30mpg all you Ram boys were bragging about? With the price of the diesel engine and the extra cost to buy the fuel, along with the extra cost of maintaining it, this engine is not worth it.

It's going to be 30mpg in reality.

how hard is it to understand that if you pay 3 grand more to get a diesel you get 90% of it back on resale?? Its like that with almost all diesels...

blah blah blah, ALL1, the point is, if you get 19.5-20 mileage, don't you think the Ecoboost, which was submitted to the same test, would get better then the combined rating, in whatever style driving you do? I am saying your driving needs are less then whatever the needs are of your trucks epa rating. So why can't that happen to the Ecodiesel? Think real hard.

Also, everybodys city mileage won't be the same, cause everybodys idea of"city mileage" will not be the same. Drive 45 to the next light, vs. stuck in traffic and barely seeing 40.

You can run 87 all you want, there is a reason they suggest you run 91. You can be alright without it when not towing. If you tow 8,000 behind it on 87, you are asking for it. But whatever, I will continue to laugh, and Ford mechanics will make big money.

Diesel...alot more reliable, unless it's a Ford truck diesel, theres that F word! 6.0 Ford, one issue after the next, Ford has had their share of forced induction issues.

I don't know much about the new F-150s, cause why would I consider spending 40k on one ugly, unreliable truck, with smaller leaf springs, after years of Mike Rowe telling us Ford made them longer for comfort, I guess they gave up on that?

I meant ECODIESEL in first line

3.2L Mazda inline 5cyl. diesel has 197hp and 346lb-ft torque.
This 3L V6 engine has 240hp and 420lb-ft torque.
I know, which engine is better.
So we have a better technology for better pricing already in here.
That's really big step for NA market. Thanks RAM.

Are you another of DiM's psuedonyms?

It's odd since DiM has gone into hibernation you arrive with a similar tact and logic of debate.

Good morning.

This also occurred in February of 2013 when I was multiposted as well.

You and DiM were involved. Exactly the same, "de ja vu".









The comments to this entry are closed.