Ram EcoDiesels Set Brisk Sales Pace

6 IMG_6485 II

Ordering for Ram's optional 3.0-liter EcoDiesel V-6 in half-ton pickup trucks started in March and sales seem to be going strong. According to Automotive News, initial orders totaled more than 10,000 units and even today pickups with those engines are on dealer lots about 13 days or less. That's not bad when you consider that the engine is an extra $2,850 and is often packaged with higher-trim-level packages that can cause a truck to ring up in excess of $50,000.

The EcoDiesel, to date, offers the best highway fuel economy in the half-ton segment at 28 mpg with a torque rating of 420 pounds-feet of torque at 2,000 rpm (but only 240 horsepower).

Automotive News also notes that the Italian VM Motori factory that produces the engine can make about 100,000 engines annually, with the potential to send half of those to the U.S. for either the Jeep Grand Cherokee SUV or the Ram 1500. So far, the take rate for the Grand Cherokee with the EcoDiesel is estimated to be about 15,000 units by the end of 2014, which theoretically leaves 35,000 engines available for the Ram 1500.

It's likely to take some time (possibly another 12 months) to find out what the take rate will be for the Ram 1500 EcoDiesel, but it sounds like discussions between Jeep, Ram and VM Motori may already be in place.

Manufacturer image


1 IMG_6439 II



A turbo in a diesel is a much different animal than a turbo in a gas engine!
A internal combustion engine is a air pump, the diesel is a more powerful air pump cause the compression is 4 or 5 times higher than a gas engine. The diesel requires more air to run so it needs a turbo, without it the diesel wouldn't run, (or run at low power)
Posted by: Tom#3 | Jul 7, 2014 3:01:25 PM

A turbo in a gas engine isn't much different from one in a diesel engine.
About the only major difference is that a Diesel turbo gets to much higher boost pressures then a gas turbo, but that is mostly due to the construction of the engine block then the urbo itself. Also diesels don't need a turbo to run, for many years (Until early 90's?) most diesel pick-ups were N/A engines.
Did they win any races? No, but they got good fuel economy and were quite reliable.

Re the "only" 240 HP comment in the article, many 18-wheeler diesel engines with huge torque numbers don't have much more horsepower than that. The torque is the more important number in these engines.

Posted by: JRT | Jul 7, 2014 1:55:49 PM

Not many newer tractor-trailer engine come out with around 240HP.
I know at the shop i work at the lowest HP engine we have is an old cummins ISX that had 285HP. Most new HD diesels have at least 300HP with some that get closer to 650HP.
As for torque being the most important number, torque will help you get moving but HP is what will get you over the hill.

At my local Ford Dealership the head truck mechanic told me every Eco-Boost they sold came back with problems related to the turbos and I made a better choice picking the 5.0 over the eco-boost.
I STRONGLY DISSAGREE with you when you say the Eco-Boost doesn't have problems.
The ONLY reason I own a F-150 is because the Ford Dealer treats me like gold after the sale .
I am too afraid if I buy a Ram or Chevy I won't be treated as good so I am stuck with Ford.
There are some issues I don't like about my F-150 and there are better things I like with the Ram and Chevy, but I just don't have the heart to leave my Ford Dealer cause they treat me so good.
:::::sniff::::::::sniff::::::::::sniff:::: I really miss the 5.4 V8::::::::sniff::::::: the 5.4 has that distinctive sound that I miss:::::::sniff:::::::sniff

I agree with you regarding the "only 240hp" comment.

I find it odd that so many on this site talk of peak hp, when in fact the FE of their pickup would be around 5mpg if they drove around "flat out".

Most only drive to moderate rpms, this is why a diesel is perfect. They can perform as well as a V8 at low to moderate speeds. But yet use far less fuel to achieve it.

A 420ftlb diesel at 2 000rpm develops more hp than a gasoline engine's 380ftlb at 2 000rpm.

Those that talk of "return of investment" should be driving a Corolla and not a V8 like some of you guys talk so much about.

I explained to our resident "gear guru" a month or so ago about how and why an engine delivers power and it's relationship to ratios.

It's also good to see the diesel engine has become accepted in the 1/2 ton pickup. It started out that way in Australia and took some years to catch on. Back in those days we had those other types who thought that only gasoline engine could provide enough motive force to move a commercial vehicle.

I can see diesel becoming more of an alternative in light commercials in the US. Europe/Asia have many light diesels to offer the US. Even Cummins is trying to gain some market with the "3 litre" Class diesel.

@Big Al, but all of this goes up in smoke if energy prices stabilize or go down. Agree?

Gas engines are cheaper to build, more flexible and more user friendly. Diesel engines are able to burn oil that has far more BTU than gas or ethanol blends.

Diesel wins in places like Europe where retail pump fuel prices are very high Gas wins if energy prices are cheap or stable.

that about sizes it up, right Al?

@papa jim,
You are correct if you are buying a diesel to drive 4 miles a day and you are buying solely for it's FE.

People like myself bought a diesel for the same reason you like a V8, but with the added FE advantage. Effortless passing on the highway, like a V8.

This article also shows that I was correct in that VM has reached peak production of the VM diesel and are pushing Pentastars at the moment. The small diesel pickup is becoming accepted in the US. It's a pity such a fine engine is fitted to such a poor vehicle.

So, why don't you go out and buy a Suzuki Samurai if FE and return of investment is so important? You don't. It's the same for a light diesel.

Maybe you should come down to Australia and drive around in our pickups, you might change your mind. If V8s are so good GM and Ford in Australia would still be around selling V8 utes in a decade, but they won't. We all be buying diesel pickups.

@Big Al

I just listed some facts. It doesn't matter what I like.

Gas engines are more flexible and user friendly. Diesel has advantages in performance--you're right--and, gas engines are cheaper to build.

There's a good reason that nobody builds diesel engines for private aviation.

@Lou lost in BC: I learned it wasn't all that, I just said I drove them because mister full of crap ALL1 stated I probably never drove one. But I did, and it didn't do much for me. Never said I was an expert, are you one?

Gotta love how he says his "combined" mileage is so he, lol, maybe he never thought about it, but maybe his sister has a different driving style and is in more bumper to bumper driving than he is.

He (ALL1) is not ALL there. He says he can do whatever in that truck and not need premium? BS! Haul a 8000 pound trailer (a lot for his 3.31s) and he would be wise to use premium gas. Regular driving, no trailer? 87 fine. Want to play at the track? Try higher octane (as he doesn't understand the 87 octane holds back timing- knock sensors )

Then there are the BEEBE types. "I have four friends with them" wow! 4 people happen to be lucky? There are a good many people with issues. ALL gone thinks cause I like Ram I must give all the other brands crap and say they are the Rams are the only dependable truck? What? No, I haven't dogged out the 5.0 Ford, the 5.7 Tundra, the 5.3 Chevy, for having reliability issues, because they aren't having issues. Sure, we get into pissing contests about power and torque, but reliability is another issue. One issue Ford can work on with their Eco trap.

@Milaeage Man

Oh crap, now there are two Turbo Yoda's.

I think you are also misunderstood because am not against Ram at all although I think they can improve in certain area to make their truck more of a truck. If Ram is better in an area than Ford then I will say it just as I stated their 8 speed V6 3.6L has better performance and FE than Ford 3.7L which is a fact. The Ramtard club doesn't mind me saying that fact, but when it come down to the fact that the Ecoboost has been proven is quicker than the Hemi in many races then they get their panties all in a wad. They don't mind the facts that show Ram in a positive light, but get pissy when the facts are not what they want to hear because it is negative towards Ram.


Again, balls would help, and if you were so concerned with fuel mileage, then why didn't you get a 3.7L? You yourself said you don't tow or haul anything.

@Big Al

It isn't just about FE. People often forget about cost per mile. Take the Canadian Truck King Challenge for instance. The Ram Ecodiesel in the challenge got 25.8 empty, 22.4 mpg hauling, and 14.6 towing. The Ram Pentastar V6 got 22.2 mpg empty, 20.3 mpg hauling, and 12.5 towing. Given that where I live in Texas diesel is on average $.50-.60 cents higher than regular octane gasoline, the Ram Ecodiesel would cost more in fuel which don't include higher maintenance cost and DEF fluid. For someone who doesn't hardly tow or haul, then the wiser choice would be the Pentastar V6 for cost saving and fuel availability depending on the fuel prices where they will be driving their truck. I am not saying diesel is bad, but you can't just spew FE numbers to say which one is better for a persons needs. You have to look at the big picture.

@TRX Tommy

Actually I tow 9,500lbs on multiple occasions throughout the year(in 100F+ Texas heat mind you) and have used 87 octane or a blend on more than one occasion because higher octane was not available. I use the Torque App( https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.prowl.torque&hl=e ) to monitor my truck when towing and nothing was ever out of spec with the temps or knocks. Of course I was running my towing tune (which I run all the time) that was specifically designed for 87 octane. The 93 tune will get me higher power than the 420hp/530lb-ft, but I prefer to run the 87 tune so I don't have to worry about if a station has premium fuel or not.

Although, at least I would only have to run higher octane when towing heavy(which is rare) and not have to run mid-grade ALL the time that is stated for that Hemi of yours. I also have 3.73 rear axle, NOT 3.31. You act if is I don't know or understand engines Tom, you forget who I use to work for? I have probably forgotten more about engines then you know.

ALL1 you just replied a complete pile of nonsense to me. Your reply didn't address what I posted. I pointed out that you cannot attempt to point out that there is a disconnect with someone being ok with a turbodiesel and cautious around a gasoline diesel. EGTs are an enormous consideration in using turbochargers and is why proper cooling is so vital to their having a reasonable lifespan.

I don't disagree with your assessment of the ecodiesel, it is a good engine for what it is, but for most truck buyers who are looking for maximal performance/dollar (and want a Ram) the pentastar is going to likely be the better choice. I do not like Chrysler's current 5.7l hemi myself, and would not buy a truck with it, but if you are after strictly performance then the hemi in the ram will outdo the ecoboost. It will last longer as well.

Okay mileage man, I'll bite. What is your consideration of a safe EGT on modern DPF diesels for it's turbos? Considering that, what EGTs are the oil/water cooled turbos on the Ecoboost rated to handle? What are the EGTs normally on an Ecoboost with heavy load? What are the EGTs under normal load? At what EGT does the direct injected Ecoboost dump fuel to cool them off?

If you don't know the answer to these questions then how can you say one will lost longer than the other?

ram just layed it all on the line for some big shot buyers. there is a huge push for this drivetrain setup in hd 1 ton reg cab trucks. literally if they built 10000 reg cab one ton 4x4 with a 3.0 diesel. the train companies, cable companies, electric companies, concrete companies, all want this setup. regular cab! 3.0 v6 turbo diesel! don't play into the luxury market ram! the people that make the world turn are calling make sure you got there back cause they always will have yours if you supply them with good products! I just layed a blue print to the future. commercial style vehicle future. start with the simplest change.

@ALL GONE: you have stated before that your work truck runs 3:31, so go ahead and lie about it?

Wow, wonder what that 87 tune does for you? Lol!

Even Mike Levine has said 87 yours runs on, higher octane recommended for best performance.

No where does it state you ALWAYS NEED 89 in a Hemi. Are you smoking weed again? It is recommended for best performance for all out performance, or TOWING HEAVY, it's like this, Ram is more conservative, Ford is on the other side, well, the sales people and the Fordtards like you are. Yeah, run 87 everywhere.
An, that Fordtards Ecoboost got it's ass kicked pulling that trailer in the last shootout, maybe they forgot the 89 or 91 octane for the Phord?

I wonder how the drag race sanctioning bodies say about a comparison or naturally aspirated cubic inches vs. turbo'd on what, 14 psi?

You sound like those Fordtards saying the 6.2 Ford will be real good because "this is the 1st gen of 6.2s" when I brought up their built on 2010 technology can't make the same power per inch as the built on 2008 tech 5.7. So what, we wait till about 2017 or 2018 for Ford to figure out the Ecoboost??!

Lol! You must've fallen off something too many times and whacked your head at Cummins!

Well i am not going to get in to all this discussions of who has the best truck, I drive a GMC Serria, but i am a Chevy man. I would like to say that it is great for RAM 1500 big diesel sales , I just Hope GM is watching the RAM sale all them diesel and wake up and start offering the diesel in the Chevy 1500 pickups.

@Alberta_85 - I don't like the e-locker, because when I was a kid, someone locked me in a locker and all I could say is "eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee"


@TRX Tommy

"you have stated before that your work truck runs 3:31, so go ahead and lie about it?"

No, you must be losing it Tom. I never have never stated I have a 3.31 rear axle. Please post this proof you have if you are going to call me liar.

Here is my proof.

My personal truck is a 3.73 and I have never stated otherwise. Look at the sixth post from the top. ---> http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2014/04/ram-unveils-updated-2014-power-wagon/comments/page/2/#comments

My work truck is a Scab Ecoboost with a 3.15 just as I stated in the first page of this article on the 14th post from the bottom.

So.......you want to take back calling me liar?

"Wow, wonder what that 87 tune does for you?"

As for the 87 tune, it does a lot for me. I customized it just for my liking. The power is good with about 420hp/530lb-ft of torque confirmed by the dyno. Ford set the shift points to too early to where I was in 6th gear by the time I hit 40mph. I made the transmission shift later in each gear to where I will hit 6th at about 55mph with normal acceleration. I also tweaked the torque converter lock up to where it locks up sooner and stays locked in while accelerating giving me all of the engines power to the ground instead of some when it is not locked in. I firmed up the shifts because firmer shifts are better for your transmission and I am a big boy and can handle firmer shifts unlike some that have to have it buttery smooth because they are used to driving sedans. The DBW(drive by wire) system was also changed to my liking giving me quicker response and feel allowing more torque at a lower pedal position. The factory DBW setting made the pedal feel spongy and was slow to respond to input making it feel like turbo lag when it wasn't. Most of the factory limiters like the boost pressure, EGT temp, and rpm limiters were left alone and the only one I changed was the mph limiter which I raised to 110 mph. The tow/haul mode changes have it downshift earlier within safe rpms to help me stop and to stay in lower gears longer before upshifting to keep me at the rpms I want to be in when going up and down the hills. It really is great tune and is night and day from the stock mapping, thanks for asking!

"Even Mike Levine has said 87 yours runs on, higher octane recommended for best performance"

Hmm, let me see. How do I explain this to you so you will understand. I can't so you will just have to read it slow or just reread it until you get it.

You see, today's engines are not like the older engines that you are probably used to. In the old fixed cam and fixed timing engines, the power was.... well.....fixed to where it will not knock at a certain octane rating. Putting higher octane in these engines will do nothing since they cannot adjust. Putting lower octane than required cause the engine to knock and loose performance since it the fixed cams and fixed timing was made for a higher octane.

Fast forward to today's variable valve timing and computer controlled ignition timing. Modern engines can advance or retard the engines timing in a fraction of a second since they have what is called a knock sensor which as you guessed it, detects engine knocking. If the knock sensor detects a knock, then it will pull engine timing and if it doesn't then it will add it to run at optimal performance. The engine will adjust itself(to a certain point) to run at the best optimal performance the fuel allows it to without knocking. This is how modern engines can adjust to different octanes and are given different power ratings IF they are designed to do so which not all are.

Take my wife's current vehicle for instance which is an Infiniti FX35. Her manual states that premium fuel is required to get the advertised 303hp and 262lb-ft. However, using 87 octane can be used but the vehicle will have diminished performance(i.e. less power). The 3.8L Genesis Coupe she had before that was the same way except it was the opposite. The owners manual recommended 87 octane to get the advertised 306hp and 266lb-ft. However, if you added premium fuel then the engine will adjust it's timing allowing it to bump up the power and performance.

The same goes with the Ecoboost or any of the other Ford VCT engines. With the Ecoboost, the advertised 365hp and 420lb-ft of torque is with 87 octane. If you use 91 octane then the with the Ecoboost, then the engine can adjust itself to add timing and perform better giving it a power output of 385hp and 430lb-ft of torque just as Mark Williams stated. This is why Ford states that adding premium will add performance, since they only advertised the power numbers on 87 octane. They can advertise the numbers on premium fuel, but they would have to recommend premium 91 octane fuel only in their owners manual and I don't think they wanted to do that.

Again, this all happens in a fraction of a second and the engine is constantly adding and taking away timing. Your Hemi is the same way. If you were able to plug the Torque App or my laptop with SCT Livelink I use to monitor my truck, then you will see you engine is constantly adjusting timing. The only difference there is since the Hemi requires 89 octane to achieve the advertised 395hp and 407lb-ft of torque then Ram has to recommend 89 octane in their manual for "optimal performance". You can use 87 octane just fine, but you will not get the advertised power numbers.

There, do you get it now? Now that you are educated on the subject manor, you can quit with your ignorant nonsense.

If it sells and is profitable then its a good idea for Ram. People (especially truck people or people buying trucks) will often buy things they dont "need", or just want, or dont even need, or dont even make sense. When you can charge a preimum for such things life is good. Its too soon to tell if it will or wont hold up. Only time and trends will tell that. There are alot of people out there that want a fuel efficient pickup truck for doing all kinds of non truck tasks while being able to be in a truck. A fuel efficient truck doesnt need to be more than adequetly powered (meaning it wont be leaving much behind at stoplights). A customer preoccupied with fuel efficency should be willing to sacrifice power and the ego that needs it and should be forgoing the types of tasks that demand it. Does this truck make good sense? To some yes it will to most it wont (but that doesnt mean they wont buy it anyway just as selecting the diesel option (and paying the premium for it) in 3/4 and 1 ton trucks doesnt make any sense for many of those that do it anyway. Its going to be interesting. The other factor is that statistically this does help Ram with its CAFE standards average. Which is a smart move as the Fiats and Darts are selling below expectations.

@Clint - improved fuel economy is something people want. I suspect that most do not do a cost/benefit study when buying.

If one looks at all of the vehicle web sites the "build your own" link shows the price it adds to the purchase cost and also the price per month that the payment is increased.

I do suspect that many look at the price per month alone. Salesmen do push that point every time I've looked at new trucks.
If a buyer feels the price per month change is negligible and sees a net gain in the fuel savings per month they will buy this truck.

For all of the rocket scientists on this page dissing the Ram 1500, the truth is that the dealers cannot keep them on the lots. I've been waiting for years for a 1500 diesel with false hopes from Chevy and Ford. In 2005 and 2006, I bought the Jeep Liberty CRD that has a 2.8 liter diesel from VM Motori. This is the same maker of the 3.0 liter offered in the 1500. I have 230k miles on my 2006 with no problems. I have a tune called the eco-tune from Green diesel engineering. My Jeep gets 31mpg highway miles and 25 in the city. My factory tuned 2005 gets 24 city and 27 highway. I will never get rid of the Jeep Liberty's and plan on purchasing a Ram 1500 ecodiesel. And by the way, the turbo is a garret which can be purchased for as little as $500.

The comments to this entry are closed.