Chrysler Gives Cummins a Big Thank You

9 Ram HDa II

Cummins Inc. was recognized by Chrysler Group LLC as a 2013 Supplier of the Year at the 2014 Annual Strategy Meeting and Supplier Awards Ceremony in Auburn Hills, Mich., last month.

Cummins actually received two separate accolades at the award ceremony: Powertrain Supplier of the Year and Technical Cost Reduction Supplier of the Year. Chrysler has been holding this event for several years, but this is the first time Cummins has won two awards in the same year.

"Our supply base manufactures more than 70 percent of the content on our cars and trucks," said Scott Kunselman, head of purchasing and supplier quality-Chrysler Group, in a statement. "It is critical that they are as focused as we are on creating innovative, high-quality vehicles that our customers want to drive. Our award-winning suppliers, like Cummins, have proven themselves to be motivated, capable and excited to be on the Chrysler team."

The suppliers were judged on performance in areas such as quality, delivery, cost, warranty and partnership. Cummins makes the 6.7-liter inline-six-cylinder turbo-diesel for the Ram 2500/3500 heavy-duty pickups and the 3500/4500/5500 Ram HD chassis cab, and has been the diesel option for Dodge/Ram trucks for 25 years.

Manufacturer image



@Johnny Doe, great question. It made me want to look up the weights of these engines and compare.

454 long block: ~680 lbs
VM Motori 3.0 diesel: 580 lbs
GM 6.5 diesel: ~750 lbs
Hemi 5.7: 485 lbs
Cummins ISV 5.0: 804 lbs (heavier than all the engines above)
Cummins ISB 6.7: 1100 lbs (an absolute tank)
Ford 6.7: 990 lbs
GM 6.6: ~830 lbs (the lightest of the big diesels, not much heaver than the Cummins 5.0)

@All 1

saying you're half right or partially correct is an old rhetorical gimmick that Al uses to minimize the importance or accuracy of your comment.

His mini-me Jeff S does the same thing.

Budella gloria RAM!!!

I migliori motori e turbo!!!

@Alex - when one looks at the dimensions and weights of engines that alone is a big factor in Ford going to Ecoboost engines. The 3.5 EB is almost identical to the Ford 5.0 V8 in size and weight but performs comparably to larger V8's and small diesels.
I am sure that the rest of the Ecoboost line has similar advantages in relation to size and weight.

The benefit is economies of scale. These engines can be tuned for a variety of applications and therefore go into multiple vehicles. Size is no longer a constraint.
Components can be downsized because engines weigh less and require less space. The other benefit to lighter more compact engines is that weight loss can reduce fuel consumption and/or be used to improve payload.

I am sure that is why Ford waited for the aluminum F150 to meet SAE J2807 ratings.

I'm sure we will see the usual suspects deride Ford for the Ecoboost line but Ford didn't build that engine line to keep the detractors happy.

Good point Lou, makes me curious as to what the 2.7EB weighs. Looks like the 3.5L is 449 lbs. 130 lbs lighter than the 3.0 EcoDiesel. I would imagine the 2.7 to be somewhat lighter.

@johnny doe- “I don't see why the 5.0L cummins would be to big or heavy...”

Johnny there is no reason why the 5.0L Cummins is too big for these trucks. The only things that are to big are the rocks papa jim’s head.

Let me go out on a limb and say that I think Fred Diaz and Simon Nagata know a little more about what engines are appropriate and compatible with the trucks they build! Jokers like papa jim and Lou BC (AKA “Lou Bull Crap”) can’t even spell Nissan, let alone give international manufactures advice on engines. The real question is are people willing to pay the premium to get one of these engines? I think the jury is still out on that one, but we’ll see.

The Ford fanboy’s are complaining because the only thing that Ford is offering them is an aluminum tin-can in 2015 and a Ford F150 diesel strategy that looks something like this....

BTW – @ Clint – “If you were foolish enough to buy a GM product in the last decade please report for your recall issue(s) that may or may not be potentially life threatening...”

Tag you’re

I have been using Variable Geometry Turbocharger 17 years ago in my Volkswagen Sharan 2.0L TDi. You have never seen anything like that in your life.
It addresses smaller/bigger turbo combo setup,but I have to admit , it's not perfect for all the engine size applications.

@papa jim--You are something else. Go watch some Fox news.

@Big Al

It has been over 24 hours since I asked you what part of my response to Alex was incorrect since you stated I was "partially correct". If you are going to call someone out for being incorrect then at least have the F'n balls to say what it was.

I think you need to reread what Alex asked.

Here let me post it for you!

"According to the link below, the next upgrade to the ISB will have a "dual stage sequential TURBO." Is this the same as a compound twin-TURBO setup?
Posted by: Alex | Jul 8, 2014 10:36:51 AM"

The I stated.....

"Sorry, I got side tracked and forgot about your question. Since Turbo Yoda is not smart enough to answer your question then I will.

No, a dual stage sequential TURBO is not the same as a compound TURBOcharger. To understand why you need a bigger turbo and a smaller one, you must know the advantages and disadvantages of both. A small TURBO can spool up quickly to reduce turbo lag, but at higher rpms it starts to spin too fast so the pressure has to go through the waste gate to slow it down not giving you any power at high rpms. A bigger TURBO has very bad turbo lag because it take quite a bit of exhaust pressure to spin the wheel, but once that wheel gets going then it is able to run at higher rpm ranges.

In a compound TURBOcharger arrangement, you have a small high pressure TURBO and a bigger low pressure TURBO. They are in a series and the small turbo always feeds the bigger TURBO. This type is a bit tricky and a fine balance between the two has to be achieved or it will not perform that well.

In a dual stage sequential TURBO arrangement, the small TURBO is used for low engine speed to spool up quickly. Then when a certain pressure or rpm is reached, it diverts all exhaust pressure to the larger TURBO through a bypass valve letting it take over. Basically, the small TURBO is for low engine rpms and the bigger one is for higher engine rpms.

Hope that helps.
Posted by: ALL1 | Jul 8, 2014 11:00:06 PM"

The you stated......

ALL1 is only partially correct in his response.

A staged compressor setup along with IGV's will allow a turbo to spool up at a lower rpm, hence giving the turbo diesel a broader torque band.

This isn't tricky as turbine ENGINES have been using multiple spooled engines for the last six and a half decades.

If you aren't aware Volvo is releasing a compound ENGINE. ALL1 needs to use Wikipedia a little better.

A compound ENGINE is the use of a supercharger in conjunction with a turbocharger, ie, the radial piston engines of old perfected this in the 40s.

What I see it the maximisation of the turbo charger. I would expect a dual spool turbo to bring on high torque from around 1 000-1 100rpm. This is significantly better than current light diesels which come in around 1 400-1 500rpm.

This would make the light diesel able to run at high torque loads at under 1 500rpm on the highway. Again improving the FE advantage diesel already has over gasoline.

This is also cheaper than a twin turbo setup. This advancement will improve turbocharging as much as IGV's had done.
Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jul 9, 2014 9:14:11 AM"

Where the -F- did you see Alex asking about a turbo-compound ENGINE. He was asking about a COMPOUND TWIN-TURBO and if it was the same as a dual stage sequential turbo. What you are talking about is totally different than what he was asking, and you have the nerve to call me out?

So where are you Big Al? You called me out and you got me so man up and tell me what was incorrect about what I posted? If I was wrong then I will man up and accept it. Maybe you just use the term "Big" in your name to make up for something that is not so big in real life since apparently you lack the testicular fortitude to respond to me when you called me out.

@All1, your thorough explanation made a lot of sense to me. I don't see how you could be only 'partially' correct on something like that.


I looked at all those strategies and Ford's was definitely the best, super relaxing, and it gets the best fuel economy too. And as a bonus you can meditate to it.

You're going to end up paying a lot more by purchasing a diesel in a half-ton. (specifically the ego-diesel). With the upfront cost, and the extra cost of diesel, and if the new F-150 gets 27+ mpg, there really is no point. The 5.0 Cummins actually gives a power incentive, over gasoline.

Ram is thanking Cummins because Nissan, and possibly even Toyota are going to get Cummins diesels. Ram's Cummins exclusivity is over.

Without Cummins Ram is

Extreme gutless

Extreme gloryless

Extreme nothing.

@Ram For the Win

But Ram uses a Japanese transmission moron.

DODGE, innovative, class exclusive, class leading. 1994 was a huge success for the newly designed DODGE Ram.


I don't think Little Al read your question right because he is talking about something totally different than what you asked. You asked about a compound turbocharger system and if it was the same as a dual stage sequential turbocharger system. Little Al is talking about a turbo-compound engines and turbo compounding. These two things are not the same as a compound turbocharger system that you were referring to.

@Dafunk,aka= clueless
"Without Cummins Ram is

Extreme gutless

Extreme gloryless

Extreme nothing."




"The V10 had the highest torque and horsepower, with the broadest usable torque curve (1,000 - 4,000 rpm) of any large gas engine in the field, when introduced. Dodge wrote, “It gives the new Ram pickup the ability to outrun all other trucks in its class with manual or automatic transmissions whether unloaded, loaded, or pulling a trailer.”


@ Ram For the Win
I will not buy from any company that is from a country that bombed pearl harbor. Scratch Nissan, Honda and Toyota off the list.

I will not buy from any company who sentences innocent Americans to death by fire, with trucks that SPONTANEOUSLY COMBUST. Scratch Ford off the list.

I will not buy from any company who builds crappy trucks. Scratch GM off the list.

That leaves only Ram.







So you don't own a TV or a smartphone? How about a computer? What is your IQ room temperature? You do know Italy fought beside the Germans in world war II right? You do know your Ram is now owned by Italians right? typical Ram owner and supporter trying to justify support while making no sense what so ever. Maybe Ram could use you as their poster boy.... the uneducated buy Ram

@All1, yeah thanks I wanted to know the difference between a twin-turbo compound setup and two-stage sequential and you clearly knew the difference. Sounds like Ram and Cummins are onto something great!

cummins...great engine wrapped in a p.o.s. ford did not make those engines. navistar did and the 6.0 was a bad design. the new power stroke is proving to be a very good engine.

truckers are in a law suit now with Navistar over there engines. the first 6.0s were indeed bad for Navistar and ford. the 6.4s were great engines but the regeneration killed gas mileage. fords new diesel is leading the industry and now with even more power and torque.

"@ Ram For the Win
I will not buy from any company that is from a country that bombed pearl harbor. Scratch Nissan, Honda and Toyota off the list."





My new car.

But you will buy from a company that is owned by Italians which is a country that killed many of our GI's in WW2? You also don't mind getting your Hemi engine from another country we were at war with kills our Border Patrol agents while imprisoning a US Marine. Come to think about, does Ram even offer a US made engine. Oh, and wasn't Chrysler owned by German car company Diamler AG from 1998 to 2007?

Don't get me wrong guys. I am not downing Chrysler because of the foreign ownership because after all, my jeep is a Chrysler product. I just think it is a little hypocritical and very ignorant minded to say you will not buy a truck from a Japanese company because of their past actions with the US when the company you buy from is owned and has been owned by companies from countries that have been at war with us as well. Especially when two of those two of those trucks you listed(Tundra and Ridgeline) are considerably higher than the Ram as the most American made made trucks with more of it's money coming back to the US.

@ Ram For the Win
I will not buy from any company that is from a country that bombed pearl harbor. Scratch Nissan, Honda and Toyota off the list.

I will not buy from any company who sentences innocent Americans to death by fire, with trucks that SPONTANEOUSLY COMBUST. Scratch Ford off the list.

I will not buy from any company who builds crappy trucks. Scratch GM off the list.

I will not buy from any company that's owned by the country who voted in Benito Mussolini so RAM is out.

I will not buy from any company that builds cars in Mexico, a country battling a bloody war with powerful drug cartels, Ford is out.

I will not buy from any that builds cars in Portuguese their labor market is terminally inert, Vinci is out.

I will not buy from any Country that has child labor like China, Tesla is out.

I will not buy from any Country with border areas with Afghanistan that are dangerous, like Pakistan, Scratch Atlas Honda off the list.

I will not buy from any Country that suffered civil war, natural disasters and corruption for decades, Haiti is out!

I will not buy from any Country that played an important role in Vietnam War, like Laos, Mekong Auto is out.

I will not buy from any Country that has Liberation Tigers, like Sri Lanka, Micro is out.

I will not buy from countries where the leaders have bad haircuts, North Korea is out!

I will not buy from any Country that has child labor like India, Tata Motors is out.

I will not buy from any Country named after a bird, like Turkey, Diardi is out.

I will buy from any country with hot chicks like:
Taiwan, Luxgen is in!
Philippines, Francisco Motors Corp is in!
Malaysia, Perodua is in!

Did anyone say happy ending?

@R3NxSTONEx - what is ironic is that those Ram guys always mention Pearl Harbour but somehow forget about "The Alamo".

@Lou BC - "The Alamo"

Hey numskull what did Fiat have to do with the Alamo?

I guess John Wayne did like Pizza...

@Dafuq - if you are going to call someone a "numskull" at least spell it correctly ;)

I love the powerstrokes don't care for those cummins

I'd like to buy a new big truck, but there are none with manual transmission any more. This is a deal breaker for me. I'm also concerned about all this electronics in newer engines. Start-Stop is another annoyance. My old truck will be around for a long time, I guess. With over 450.000 miles my Diesel is not even broken-in.

since ram only has less than 10 percent of the truck market, it hardly makes them the best at anything. Cummins, by contrast, is a proven leader in any platform it has been put in. Sine Ram will no longer be using the Cummins engine, it is just a matter of years before its truck line goes under. Ram is not the Ram we grew up on. It USED to be an American company. Now with Nissan using Cummins, it will quickly surpass Ram.Since Ford bought Cummins, and their own Power stoke engines mirroring Cummins in perferance... Ram is going the way of the dodo bird

The comments to this entry are closed.