Dealers Order 8,000 EcoDiesels in First Three Days

Ram EcoDiesel II

By John Cappa

If there was any doubt about pent-up demand for a light-duty turbo-diesel engine, those questions have been answered. More than 8,000 EcoDiesel-powered 2014 Ram 1500s were ordered by Chrysler Group dealers between Feb. 7 and 10.

According to Automotive News, the figure represents nearly 50 percent of the half-ton pickup's typical monthly production; more than 400 of these pickups have already been sold to customers.

Bob Hegbloom, director of Ram, told Automotive News that the number represents about five times the normal percentage sold for a typical pre-launch vehicle.

"This just helps solidify in our minds that we did the right thing with this truck," Hegbloom said.

Ram President and CEO Reid Bigland had estimated that 30 percent of the Ram 1500 sales could be powered by the EcoDiesel V-6 punching out 240 horsepower and 420 pounds-feet of torque.

Hegbloom added that the percentage of initial half-ton diesel orders is double or triple what brand executives had anticipated. He believes that demand will likely taper off as unsold inventory is received by the dealers. He also mentioned that production priority will be given to pre-sold orders in an effort to minimize customer wait times.

It was almost a year ago that Ram announced the Ram 1500 half-ton diesel, which went into production last month at the Warren Truck Assembly Plant near Detroit. The pre-spec vehicles should be delivered to the dealers in the next three weeks.

To read the Ram press release, click here.

6 IMG_6485 II



I would be willing to bet good money that most of the guys commenting here can't afford a new truck(including me). Even to those who can, $50k ain't no walk in the park and when I am ready to spend that much on a new truck I will be pretty darn sure I'm buying exactly what I want.

@ Hemi monster, Let the trolls troll. I sure as hell won't be buying a Diesel anytime soon. (not for any price) I am going to a 2500 Power Wagon Laramie with the class kicking 6.4 HEMI POWER under the hood. I will do circles around this 3L Diesel. On or off road.



I don't know what Ram is doing, but I don't think that their payload ratings are any more realistic than Ford's tow ratings. I am guessing that their payload numbers will just spike up at some point in the future.

I don't know what you've been doing with your Ram, but I have towed with most current trucks out there and most powerplants at this point, I have not spent time in a Tundra - ever, nor have I spent time behind the wheel of any of the new GM powerplants. I have towed with the Ram 1500 both Pentastar (not a lot of fun) and hemi (works fine), F150 with ecoboost, 5.0, and the 6.2 (buddy has a raptor), and I've spent time with a Titan years ago. With the Ram 1500 and the choice of coils they have put on that you need airbags by about 6k pounds. That's just the price of admission if you want the softer coils they put in the 1500. Hopefully they will put progressive coils in it like they have in the 2500s in the future. With all of the hoopla surrounding the Ford (and now GM) aluminum switchovers to lose weight I am expecting all half tons to have coil springs within a few years. They weigh less than leafs and as long as they are engineered well should outperform leafs in almost every way (though they won't survive overloading as well).

For me half tons exist to pull 6k-8k pounds. Under 6k pounds you can use something smaller, over 8k pounds larger trucks make life much easier (especially if you go to a gooseneck instead of bumper pull). I think that the ecodiesel will work very well in that range. That said, as much as I like Ram's current trucks, I have not been a fan of Chrysler's reliability in the past. Maybe you like your Ram and have had good service from it, but for my part I would give the ecodiesel at least 3 years on the market before I would consider buying it. Hopefully by that time the price differential will have dropped as well.

Ram just jumped on board with the frame twist comparison

Posted by: Alex | Feb 19, 2014 8:32:56 PM


@HEMI V8 & Alex
Wow that video shows it all. The difference between the 2 trucks is incredible. If my next truck an HD, I know what I'm getting and what not to get.

@HEMI MONSTER, Ram may not win all the drag races. But they sure build strong trucks.

@Mileage Man - I agree with your assessment. Most truck buyers will tow in the 6-8k range. I have looked at trailers in the 6k range which is at the max for small trucks and well within the ratings for any 1/2 ton (with or without magic spring dust).
I do think that the VM Motori 3.0 will turn out to be reliable since it is new only to the USA/Canada. The rest of the truck is what I am concerned about. Ram rates poorly on JD Power and every other rating service I've looked at.

@HemiV8 - I can afford any truck I want but I put my family first. My kids go to private school which is equivalent to a mortgage payment or the payment on a high end truck. My current truck is a 2010 and there are no loans on it nor are there any loans on my wife's van.
I chose to invest in my children's future.

@LouBC, "The problem is that anyone wanting one and planning to do any real work with it."

Again you are confused. The Ram 1500 has never been marketed as a work truck. Ford does that. This is a lifestyle truck that gets best in class mpg and Ride. NOT A WORK TRUCK.
If you want a work truck buy a Class leading RAM 2500.

@Mileage Man

Having a higher tow rating isn't just about who has the most powerful engine or most speeds in their transmission. If you look at the technical specifications of both the Ram 1500 and Ford F150 then you will start to notice the difference. For one, the F150 has bigger front and rear 6-lug axles with more splines while the Ram has smaller axles front and rear with only 5-lugs. If more payload capability is needed, Ford offers a HD package F-150 with a 7-lug axle giving you a payload of over 2,000lbs in a 4x4 crew cab. The front brakes and rotors are also bigger on the F150 with more brake surface area while the rear brakes being almost identical in both. As you have already pointed out, the coil springs suspension is not good without air bags which also add a lot of weight to the truck decreasing payload. The F150s have the biggest leaf springs of all half tons and offer more springs in the HD package for it's greater payload. Stiff springs may offer a stiff ride when unloaded, but it greatly increases loaded stability without that uneasy back end bounce with a trailer. Ram finally beefed up the 1500s frame for 2013, but it is still not as strong as the F150s hydro-formed frame with a yield strength of 36,000psi. These are reasons why the F150 has a higher payload and tow rating. I know these fan boys will just say they have it higher just cause, but if you take a look under both trucks you see the difference. I am pretty sure you felt the difference from all the trucks you have stated you driven.

@HEMI V8 - for 50% of the buying public, trucks are lifestyle choices. You do not need a lifted Ram for work just like you do not need a PowerWagon. You want one for recreational pursuits which is lifestyle.

My lifestyle dictates that I need a truck that can carry myself and my family along with dogs plus enough gear to go on a vacation 9 hours to the big city or 9 hours to the middle of no-where.
Case in point, I'm helping out my son's boy scout troupe this weekend. 4 young boys and a winter camp out worth of gear would max out the "loaded" Ecodiesel. If one adds them plus their gear and the "safety" gear I carry when ever I venture out into the winter backcountry, that would even push the limits of the tradesman crewcab 4x4.

A diesel truck with 26 US MPG would be ideal but not if it can't carry anything. Even the 1200lb rating for a stripped out Tradesman is below par.

The fully equipped truck with a 490 lb capacity would not even fit the soccer mom or hockey mom wanting to pack 4 teenagers to a sporting event.

Ram can spin the 1500 as a lifestyle vehicle but the direction they have gone means they are targeting any mid sized SUV or 4 door sedan driver.

That would be a lifestyle for anyone who doesn't really want a truck but wants to pretend that they do.

If you say the Ram Ecodiesel targets the "lifestyle" buyer, why is that combo in the tradesman?

Ram targets the "Tradesman" as the name implies ....... to Tradesman. That means WORK TRUCK.

Good luck with that Mexican built, Italian owned, Denmark based, English tax centred FCA Power Wagon.

Just leave your ideology and logic on the ground when you climb into the cab.

@Johnie Doe,
Isuzu owns part of the factory and owns the rights to the engine and its development. GM does the actual installation and design of the vehicle to be used.

@jim the hurt locker was 2 years ago. The test I shown was current. I do agree thought the next gen up grade Allison transmission can't get here fast enouch to be more MPG and mountain goat/pulling monster friendly.

Wow, a lot of bitching on here just trying to belittle the best truck in the class.

Sure the Rams don't have overinflated hauling numbers like the rest of the competition (I would like to see every Ram have about 200 lbs more payload), but if I had to haul 800 to 1200 lbs (numbers that 95% of halftone users never hit) on a daily basis there is no other half-ton truck on the market that will do it as confidently or safely then the Ram.

One thing over looked by a lot of you internet experts is the Ram's 5 link is more stable under load then the 4 link leaf springs. The Ram has 25% more mechanical levers keeping it's axel located squarely under the frame, which means less lateral sway. Less lateral sway mean more stability. Sure Ford says the Fteenthousand can haul 2200lbs. But what is the point when the truck starts to sway uncontrollable every time it get hit by a cross wind?

It will be more interesting to see what the results are over a longer period of time.

A few days really doesn't prove much.

Personally, overtime I do think the diesel pickup will be a bigger hit than most will realise.

Most who blog on this site aren't the average Joe Bloggs who is buying these vehicles.

Also, as these vehicles become more and more SUV orientated as is shown by the Ram's load capacity women will have a greater involvement of the purchase of these vehicles.

One thing I would like to point out, is that somehow as Ford's f150s get heavier, they somehow get larger GVWRs to go with it, even with NO CHANGES to the suspension, brakes, power, cooling at all. If that isn't the biggest LIE in advertising I don't know what is.

Case in point: GVWR MAX PAYLOAD
1)SuperCrew 4x4 145" 3.5L EcoBoost V6 7200 1520
2)SuperCrew 4x4 157" 3.5L EcoBoost V6 7350 1560

Truck 2) is heavier, yet some how it gained 150lbs in gvwr and gained 40lbs in payload when, compared to truck 1), yet truck 2) had no changes to suspension, brakes, power or cooling. Hmm, how would that happen unless Ford lies about its gvwr?

This case is even more laughable:
3)SuperCab 4x4 145" 3.5L EcoBoost V6 7200 1660
4)SuperCab 4x4 163" 3.5L EcoBoost V6 7450 1780

In this case, truck 4) gained even more weight over truck 3), then the trucks in the previous example. Yet even while being much heavier, truck 4) had it's numbers improve by 250lbs and 120lbs! That is even larger amounts then the trucks in the previous example!!!

The way I look at it is Ram is the only player in the market, that isn't SAE certified, that has even close to accurate Payload numbers. Ram's lightest truck with it's lightest engine has the highest payload numbers. And because every Ram as the SAME GVWR (that doesn't seem to magically go up as the trucks get heavier), as the engines get heavier and the trim lines make the truck heavier, the Max Payload goes down. Sad but true. But at least it is the truth, instead of the marking magic that ford does, just to post the largest GVWR/payload numbers.

IMO Ford's base GVWR is 6700, their lightest truck with their lightest engine. That means an XLT EB 4x4 CrewCab 6.5' which weighs approx. 5800lbs would only have a payload of approx. 900 lbs without ford's marketing fluff applied. Now ask yourself who really has a laughable payload?

@Big John
What do you know of setting tow limits?

Did you know that slight engineering changes can dramatically alter tow limits?

I don't support the methodology in determining current tow limits on any pickup. But ALL of the manufacturers are as guilty as each other.

You are talking bull$hit.

Big John, Fords numbers vary depending on the model configuration, because several things ARE changed. They use thicker and higher strength steel for the frames on the longer wheel bases, and some crew cabs. They also vary the spring packs, and front suspensions. If you take the time to dig into the details. Ford changes a lot of things that back up the increased payload and towing numbers.
I think Ram's issue with these low payloads is due to the soft coils they use for a better ride. They could offer a beefier coil and boost the payloads for those who want to use their truck like a truck. Also, their air bags seem to be more of an 'air ride' package rather than an 'air suspension' package. By adding their air bags, you lose payload capacities, which is the exact opposite of what everyone expected when they announced the bags.

Who's numbers are correct. According to Autoweek those 8000 rams are sold out already.

According to heavy Ford biased only 400 have been sold.

Who is reporting the correct numbers. At this point Autoweek carries far more credibility than does this Ford Biased site.

Just food for thought.

Big John,

You are comparing two Fords with same cab configuration but different wheel bases. Of course the longer of the two wheelbases has a heavier frame, which means it can have more payload capacity. Now compare an extended cab/6.5 bed to a crew cab/5.5 bed, same engine, drivetrain, axle ratio, etc. The argument would be to compare different cabs on the same (or similar) wheelbases/length, like truck number 1 in both scenarios listed above in your post. Assuming the trucks have the same GVWR, the heavier bigger crew cab is going to have a lower payload rating of 1,520 lbs versus the extended cab's 1,660. Generally the maximum payload of any truck goes to the base-grade regular cab 8' box two wheel drive with the V8 engine.

"Generally the maximum payload of any truck goes to the base-grade regular cab 8' box two wheel drive with the V8 engine." I meant to say - for those that don't carry a regular cab model - the least equipped or base-grade model.

Just dropped my 2002 Duramax Crew Cab 4x4 Allison with 273,000 mi by the Chevy dealer for a front end alignment, and auxiliary fuel filter kit install. Walked on the lot to browse the new trucks. A well equipped 1500 Silverado Crew Cab LT 4x4 with 5.3L stickered for $50,000 after deducting $2500 in incentives. IF I was stupid enough to by an brand new 1/2 ton truck for $50K, (as a satisfied Chevy Duramax owner) I'd buy the Ram Eco-diesel crew cab 4x4 with a ram box first.

BTW, my Duramax stickered for $48,950 in 2002. I bought it in 2003 Certified Pre-owned with 18,000 miles (barely a scratch on it) for $32,000 out the door. Plan on keeping it to 400,000 miles. That will means I will have effectively worn out 2 gasoline v-8 1/2 tons for $32,000. Not too shabby in this day and age. My next truck will likely be a 1/2 ton diesel. My brother sold his Duramax a few years ago and went back to a 1/2 ton Dodge Hemi to "save on fuel and maintenance costs." He regrets his decision to this day.
Once you go diesel, it's very hard to go back to gas and be satisfied......especially if you tow anything.

@Big John

Depending on what the weakest link is, not all of those things that you stated have to be changed. As for the trucks you stated above, there are changes in the suspension of those trucks depending on the trucks GVWR. As you can see on pages 92-93 of the ford technical specifications below, the differences of those trucks are there front GAWR. The shorter wheel base trucks have a front GAWR of of 3,900 while the longer wheel base trucks have a a front GAWR of 4,050. If you take those GAWRs number down to page 99 of the sheet, you will see that in fact the springs are different.

On a side note, if you look at page 97 you will see there are difference in radiators between the different towing packages. Also, on page 98, you will see the frame strength depending on the cab configuration. Notice how the Raptor is different in a lot of ways.

Good thing they are going to all be using the towing standards. Then we won't need this argument, although some people will still say one brand or another is cheating the system somehow. My guess is at the current time they are all pretty close to the standard so that there isn't a huge change when they all officially adopt the standard. It's not like they just pull the numbers out of thin air, and I'm guessing the numbers are mostly pretty accurate. It also does make sense why a manufacturer would underrate their truck as they do for HP and Torque numbers sometimes, but they wouldn't do it to the extent that their truck looks like a weak pile of crap as ram has done. Ford is changing their truck this year, so I guess we'll never know for sure, but it is worth mentioning that they are telling us towing capacities will increase with the new truck, so it's unlikely they inflated their numbers by much if at all. As ALL1 stated all you have to do is look under the trucks to see some big differences. I fell for the salesman's pitch when I bought my ram. This time I'm going to check out each truck more thoroughly before I make a decision. I totally overlooked the fact that my ram would have such a terrible payload capacity. I just assumed it would be close to the other trucks.

@mileage man
I have a different use for trucks than most people. As far as towing and payload, I rarely tow anything heavy more than 45 miles from my home, but I often put my trucks to the limit for a brief stint accross a field or maybe 10 miles to the other end of the farm or 10 miles to my seed or fertilizer supplier etc. I'm sure I overloaded my old f-150 many times, but it has handled it well. I couldn't tell you what half of the loads I put on my truck weigh, but I know how different trucks respond to the same load. It is absolutely amazing the difference between my ram and my super duty or my ram and the seed suppliers f-150, or my workers' silverado, or my old f-150, my brothers ram 2500, my other brother's duramax etc. etc. I don't know what any of the trucks are rated, but I know for a fact the ram has the most ridiculously low capacity of any of the trucks i've experienced. The only trucks I haven't experienced much of are the Tundra and titan. The f-150 (my seed and fertilizer supplier sometimes delivers the trailers to me) pulling the same trailer as my ram handles the load so much better. I don't care much about what the numbers are, the comparisons I see on my farm speak for themselves. I can see many of these people think they are experts because they know the numbers and they read up on the trucks, but there is no comparing the real world experience of seeing the trucks side by side being pushed beyond their rated limits fairly regularly.

Ex-Hemi Guy ... You should watch what you say about the Italians in public.

Remember, they have not found a trace of Hoffa yet.


For what you do it sounds like GM or Ford would have been the better choice. If you overload the truck a lot its fairly easy to throw another leaf or two in to help out with that. The coils in the Ram really need airbags as it gets loaded. To be clear this is a limitation with Ram's choice of coils in the 1500, not of coils in general. If they went to some progressive springs like they have in the 2500's it would help the 1500 out quite a bit. There is also zero reason to put an air spring suspension in a truck without it dramatically improving hauling and towing without futzing around with leveling kits or airbags. I am pretty sure I saw on allpar somewhere that the capacity of the Ram 1500's air springs is pretty high, high enough that it won't be the limiting factor on any Ram half ton, which begs the question of why their payload ratings are so ridiculously low. I have not used a Ram with air suspension at all, but my guess is that it probably works well, the guys I know with the same system in the Grand Cherokee speak highly of it. Either way its another potential big cost item if its poorly designed / set up, and something I would give a few years before considering purchasing.

For what its worth I have not noticed any real difference in vehicle control while towing with F150's or Ram 1500s, but II always had airbags in the Rams and I don't have a slick setup like this website where I can run trucks back to back to compare them. If anything the only real difference I can remember from my experiences is that the ecoboost F150 certainly seems to accelerate faster. I never timed 0-60 since I don't care about that, but the perception is that its faster. I strongly disagree with the guys who claim it has a torque curve "like a diesel" though, the ecoboost is great but clearly makes it power at higher RPMs and runs higher RPMs than the couple of diesels I have spent time in. Maybe that's pedantic but I have crossed paths with a few ecoboost fanboys over the past couple weeks and their fanboy worship of their brand has irritated me.

@ Big John
You wrote "Sure the Rams don't have overinflated hauling numbers like the rest of the competition (I would like to see every Ram have about 200 lbs more payload), but if I had to haul 800 to 1200 lbs (numbers that 95% of halftone users never hit) on a daily basis there is no other half-ton truck on the market that will do it as confidently or safely then the Ram"
800 lbs is a really low number, that i normaly hver right around when you load up people and gear. going skiing with 3 friends and ski gear pertty much puts my raptor over its limits, granted when i off road its normaly just me in the truck, but I find that im frquently right at the 880lb max payload of my truck. I'm goign skiing this weekend in Colorado with my friend together we weigh 375lbs i strugle to keep my bag with all my boots and ski cloths under 50lbs at the airport, and onther 50lbs for my skis my friend will be bringin around the same weight, my bed cover weighs around 50 lbs, so thats another 250lbs we'll probably bring a cooler with food so we are not over paying up in the resorts, another 50lbs, so for two guys to go skiing for the weekend im looking at 675Lbs in a truck that maxes out at 880lbs if we add anyone else we can only take a small child and their gear, as there is only 205lbs remianing.

BTW the Raptor rides much nicer than any other truck.

@LouBC & All1, Here is how the eco diesel compares to Fords V6's 3.7 which is the best ford has for fuel economy which they don't even offer in a crew cab.

Ram eco diesel 6.4 bed 8 speed auto 4x4 crew.
1,205 haul 8,700 tow.

Ford 3.7 V6 only super cab. No crew. 6 speed 4x4
1,510 haul 6,900 tow.

Ford eco boost crew 4x4 3.5 turbo 6 speed.

1,300 haul 7,200 tow.

3.7V6 Ford 17,23,19

3.0L Ram 20,28,23

3.5 Ford eco boost 15,21,17

@BigJohn - IIRC Ford has 3 separate frame thicknesses and crossmember configurations. The 6.5 box crewcab trucks use the same frame configuration as the HD 1500.

You need to look at individual specs to determine why one truck has better ratings in the same lineup.

Does Ram 1500 use different frames based on configuration or GVW ratings?

Does GMC use differnt frame frames baed on configurations or GVW ratings?

In Ram's case, I'd have to say NO since the ratings drop as you change cab and box configurations.

@HemiV8 - a small diesel should NOT be compared to a base V6. That is truly pathetic and flies in the face of why one would want a small diesel in the first place.

IF mpg and cost were my primary considerations, the Annual Physical tends to show that the GMc 1500 with the V6 would be a great choice. The new GM's haven't been selling as well as expected so one could find a V6 for a decent price. At least that truck has ane excellent cargo capacity which is a big reason why most people buy trucks.

Had a good chuckle at ex-Hemi Guy's comment. I guess he doesn't realize the Duramax was designed by Isuzu and built by a joint effort between Isuzu and GM. GM tried to build their own diesel back in the 1980's but it was a really bad engine and flopped big time. So this "American" diesel this guy refers to is basically Japanese with American capital behind it.

The EcoDiesel offers only one real advantage and that's its pulling power for such a small engine. True, it offers incredible fuel mileage for a full size truck, but the cost-savings once realized by going diesel is long gone, as diesel fuel has gone from an average of $0.30 below regular gas to $0.70 ABOVE regular gas. When you consider that many of the small V6s that offer a slight loss on gas mileage still require mid-grade or high-grade gas, again the fuel mileage benefit is essentially destroyed as far as operator cost is concerned.

Also, diesel has never really been an ideal choice for short-run usage. Sure, there have been a lot of improvements in design, but they're still most efficient in long-run operations where they work six, eight, twelve or even twenty-four hours per day. A run of say, ten minutes here, five more to another stop, maybe fifteen to yet a third stop then back home to sit for eighteen hours before another spate of short runs is hard on them. This doesn't mean diesel can't handle it, after all, a certain parcel delivery service does short-run operations on diesel engines all the time--but they're again used for twelve hours or more every single day except Sundays. How long will this diesel last in typical consumer use?

@ Hemi V8

Wow, way to cherry pick data to make it seem like your favorite brand is ahead. Seriously, do you really think that less of Ram that you have to give it a handicap in order to look better?

The 3.7L DOES come in a crew cab, just not in 4x4.

Also, the Ecoboost payload and towing numbers you conveniently picked are for the plush $55k Limited model only, and would compare to Ram's Limited model. Let's compare them shall we.

Ram Limited Ecodiesel Crew cab 4x4 3.92 axle
payload: 881lbs.
towing: 8,500lbs

F150 Limited Ecoboost Crew cab 4x4 3.73 axle
payload: 11,300lbs
towing: 7,500lbs

The numbers you quoted for the Ecodiesel was the highest you can get in that cab configuration and is for a regular SLT. When compared to a regular XLT F150, here is how they stack up.

Ram SLT Ecodiesel Crew Cab 4x4 short bed 3.92 axle
towing: 8,750lbs

F150 XLT Ecoboost Crew Cab 4x4 Short bed 3.31 axle
payload: 1,520lbs
towing: 9,200lbs

If you needed more then that then you can move up to a max tow packaged F150 that gives you 1,900lbs payload.

If I were like you and only cherry picked data to make Ford look good then I would really blow you out of the water with the most an F150 is rated for.

F150 XLT Ecoboost Crew Cab 4x4 3.73 axle (with max tow and HD payload package that give you more leafs on the leaf springs and a 7 lug axle)
payload: 2,330 lbs
towing: 11,300lbs

However, I am not like you and don't cherry pick data and like to compare trucks with similar capabilities. Not picking the worst capable trim in the competition and putting it up against my best trim package that don't even compare.

Sorry, the phone keeps auto correcting my numbers. It is supposed to b this above.

F150 Limited Ecoboost Crew cab 4x4 3.73 axle
payload: *1,330lbs
towing: 7,500lbs

Sorry another error from above. It should be this for the Ram.....

Ram Limited Ecodiesel Crew cab 4x4 3.92 axle
payload: 881lbs.
towing: *8,750lbs

@All1, "Wow, way to cherry pick data to make it seem like your favorite brand is ahead."


So i can't have Fords best V6 mpg with crew 4x4. lol
I guess your camping trip is going to be pretty crowed. lol

@All1, Oh and hope their is paved road on your camping trip with out 4x4.


WTF are you talking about? Have you been sniffing paint? You can get the 3.5L Ecoboost Crew cab in 4x4 with either a 3.31, 3.55, 3.73, or 4.10 axle(3.15 is only in 2wd). However you cannot with the base 3.7L engine.

Wait........are you trying to compare the F150 base 3.7L to the Ram Ecodiesel? Really? There capabilities aren't even close. You must really think less of the Ecodiesel than I do to compare it to an engine with considerably less capabilities. Either that or you know it doesn't stand a chance against Ecoboost so you have to pick a lesser engine.

@johnny doe

It doesn't matter that the hurt locker was 2 years ago. The Powerstroke and Duramax are the same and so are the transmissions. That comparison still applies! Good luck buying the third place truck :)

I don't think HEMI V8 realizes every time he posts a comment we all laugh at him! Give it up dude, you keep making that hole deeper!

@ jim - it does appear that HemiV8 fits the definition of insanity: doing the exact same thing over and over again but expecting different results each time ;)

@ jim No the powerstroke in the test I posted is updated, read the story.

@johnny doe

I did read it! You go read it now! Apparently you didn't read your own story!

Heavy Duty Hurt Locker
Ford HP 400 Torque 800

You're current post
Ford HP 400 Torque 800

So where's the updated Powerstroke you say is here?

@johnny doe

The Ford isn't a 2015! They're not available yet. There's nowhere in your story that says it is. Why do you think it is? The only one referred as a 2015 is the GM twin.

That frame twist youtube video really shows that F150 must be mounted on a Tundra frame or it's made of Jello.Can't even get the tailgate open. What a Ford Fail. Ram for a superior frame, and the best looking and truck on the road..


I have went over every video linked on this site? What video are you speaking of that shows the F150s frame being twisted? If you are referring to the video where Ram likes to use their duallys as off camber rock crawlers, then that does not apply to the F150. The F250 on up have C channel frames, and the F150 is a hydro-formed fully boxed frame.

@Johnny doe: I don't care if you don't understand inertia, and the fact that taller and heavier wheels take longer to stop. No sweat off my balls, I know you don't understand much.

How about the handling and braking of the Ram with coils in the 30k shootout, with 2 passengers abd 1000 pounds? Yeah, that's a Chivy and Ram on 265/70 17s, and at some point they will compare them with 70 series tires.

And weight makes a differance, I know it's hard for you to imagine a crew cab loaded with about everything, and heaviest engine, vs. Shivy's smaller cab and lightest engine, and a fraction of the options, and the Chivy has what a 31.9 inch tire, all too get a whopping 20.4 mpg from a 4x2? Fail!

Speaking of smaller tires, you once said your neighbor barely got around on a 275/60 20 Ram tire in snow, well duh, how do you think he would do with Chivy's 275/55, yeah 55 series tires on a 4x4. Well, it makes people think it drives more like a car, lol, unfortunitly, several reviews have testers of Chivy's 4x4 missing ground clearance, no mattet what gibberish you say.

Consumer Reports said they scraped ground, but they liked the low step in and the 1 mpg better, from less power, so they gave them the nod, lol. Some 4x4 requirements they have!

4 Wheeler Magazine tore up the front of their 4x4 Chivy 1500, and they even said it was pretty low.

Then Petersons Offroad compared a v-6 Ram to a Chivy, and they
bottomed out the air damn, on said Chevy, they even dented the bumper, lol.

Oh, the truck in the v-6 annual was an air supsension truck, say it with me, air suspension, not a coil spring bigger an airbag.

Which was also what won the empty and loaded autocross in the last shootout. You see, it keeps the back end level.

@TRX Ram coils replace Crown Vic - "You see, it keeps the back end level."

Not hard to do when it can carry SFA.

@All1," F150 is a hydro-formed fully boxed frame."

Posted by: ALL1 | Feb 20, 2014 8:46:48 PM

And who do you think started doing that first?? (Hint)

Ram in 2002.

The comments to this entry are closed.