Ram 1500 to get diesels in late 2013?

[mainer29]

Information Here. Ram to get diesels in late 2013? at Allpar Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep News

 

[Grizzly]

I heard that story about 7 years ago and nothing happened.

 

[HBarlow]

Seeing is believing according to the old adage.

 

[jgillott]

If done correctly, a 1/2 diesel could have great potential. However, the V8 diesels currently being offered by the others just makes me cringe to think of what the production vehicle would look like. I'm not a fan of complexity.



If they could come up with a good diesel 1/2 offering that wasn't overly complex and unreliable, I'd be interested. I'll I'd need was something putting out ~200HP and ~450 lb/ft tq that averaged 20+ mpg.

 

[rscurtis]

Now that Sergio is in charge, I would give it more credibility than it had in the past. But at 18/23 MPG, what's the point of buying one? That small difference won't even cover the price differential between gas and diesel fuel. Looks like the VM V6 would be a better choice.

 

[jgillott]

Now that Sergio is in charge, I would give it more credibility than it had in the past. But at 18/23 MPG, what's the point of buying one? That small difference won't even cover the price differential between gas and diesel fuel. Looks like the VM V6 would be a better choice.

I agree, I'd like to see the MPG rating a little higher. Our 1500 gets 14 mpg on average and maybe 19 in all highway driving down hill with a strong tail wind. Put a load or a small trailer on it and forget anything over 11-12. A solid 18 would be a marked step forward. I'd rather see a small diesel than something like the Ecoboost deal.

 

[BILLUA]

If done correctly, a 1/2 diesel could have great potential. However, the V8 diesels currently being offered by the others just makes me cringe to think of what the production vehicle would look like. I'm not a fan of complexity.



If they could come up with a good diesel 1/2 offering that wasn't overly complex and unreliable, I'd be interested. I'll I'd need was something putting out ~200HP and ~450 lb/ft tq that averaged 20+ mpg.

The funny thing is, that is almost exactly the figures that my '01 2500 with 5. 9 Cummins hit.



Now, I have a 2011 BMW 335 D that puts out 265hp und 425tq out of a 3. 0 liter inline 6 that gets 30mpg in mixed driving.



The technology is out there to re engine the 1500's , wranglers and others with a powerful and economical turbodiesel.



My bet is with a European now fully in charge we will see more diesels migrate across the pond in Chrysler vehicles.

 

[jgillott]

The funny thing is, that is almost exactly the figures that my '01 2500 with 5. 9 Cummins hit.



Now, I have a 2011 BMW 335 D that puts out 265hp und 425tq out of a 3. 0 liter inline 6 that gets 30mpg in mixed driving.



The technology is out there to re engine the 1500's , wranglers and others with a powerful and economical turbodiesel.



My bet is with a European now fully in charge we will see more diesels migrate across the pond in Chrysler vehicles.

I also had a 2001 2500 with a 5-speed that I purchased new. It replaced a 1992 automatic that I traded on it. Going from the '92 to the '01 seemed like a huge jump in power and capability. I modified the '01 to the point that it was no longer usable for daily use, but when new and unmolested, it frankly would do everything I needed a truck to do. Realistically, I don't need much more power than that on a regular basis. The capability of the newer trucks I've purchased have increased, but the loads that I tow/haul are basically the same as they were nearly 20 years ago when I bought my 1992.

 

[rscurtis]

You're right. Most of us could get by with a 4 cylinder version of the 6. 7. The only thing it would lack is the inherent balance of the inline six.

 

[Deleted member 995608]

The funny thing is, that is almost exactly the figures that my '01 2500 with 5. 9 Cummins hit.



Now, I have a 2011 BMW 335 D that puts out 265hp und 425tq out of a 3. 0 liter inline 6 that gets 30mpg in mixed driving.



The technology is out there to re engine the 1500's , wranglers and others with a powerful and economical turbodiesel.



My bet is with a European now fully in charge we will see more diesels migrate across the pond in Chrysler vehicles.

Well too bad that Europe has completely different ideas about emissions than the US. I am hopeful but doubtful.

 

[HBarlow]

Very unlikely for lots of reasons.

One, Chrysler is just recovering from a financial disaster and in this nobama economy sales and profits are good but not great and the economic future of the nation is uncertain at best. Chrysler's car line is stale and badly in need of new models which will cost hundreds of millions of dollars. Chrysler is unlikely to also undertake a major undertaking that will cost hundreds of millions of dollars to offer a diesel in the Ram 1500 now.

Secondly, a Ram 1500 diesel would take sales away from the Ram 2500s and Ram 3500s.

Third, many "think" or say they want a Ram 1500 diesel but it would have a price tag nearly equal to a Ram 2500 or 3500 so would buyers actually buy them? I have some doubts.

Fourth, diesel fuel is more expensive than gasoline and if nobama manages to steal this upcoming election he will drive diesel prices up even more. Tree huggers don't like diesels. They have no use for them on the streets of San Francisco, NY, or DC. What would sales predictions be for an expensive new Ram 1500?

Fifth, the United States government meaning the EPA and other bureaucracies, has for years taken an anti-diesel approach layering more taxes and more restrictive emission controls on them every several years. It will get worse if nobama is reelected.

A diesel 1/2 ton is not going to happen IMO.

 

[Wingate]

Very unlikely for lots of reasons.







Third, many "think" or say they want a Ram 1500 diesel but it would have a price tag nearly equal to a Ram 2500 or 3500 so would buyers actually buy them? I have some doubts.

Harvey,



Its funny you mention this... . I have recently decided to add another truck to my stable of un-used vehicles!!!. .

I called 3 different dealerships and had them give me hard quotes on a 2012 Ram 2500 Laramie Longhorn completely loaded with every option except for a snow plow and "rambox"... but with the 5. 7L GASOLINE engine, 4:10 gears and limited slip... All three said this should be no problem as they could just find one and dealer trade for it... . All three eventually called back saying it would have to be ordered since there were none in the USA. . !!!

The quotes from 3 different dealerships were within $300. 00 of each other!.

I gave it a few days and called each of them back asking for their best deal on a 1/2 ton version of the same thing... exact same options with the one exception the 1/2 tons best optional gear ratio is 3:92 vs the 3/4 ton is 4:10, but the $$$ amount of the optional gear is the same... .

The price for either truck is identical... all three dealerships came back with a number within $100. 00 of their 3/4 ton special order quotes!!!!...

I questioned each of the three about this and none of them could come up with an answer..... Other than to say that nobody had ever ordered a Laramie Longhorn 3/4 ton 4x4 with a gas engine before!!. .

I can see absolutely no incentive to buy a loaded out 1/2 ton truck!. .

Add a Diesel option and holy crap Batman!!!. .

 

[HBarlow]

That's even worse than I assumed.

I know many are buying new Gen IV Ram diesels expecting the fuel economy of the '90s when the 12 valves or VP-44 24 valves with no emissions crap produced fuel mileage as high as 18 to 20 mpg. The problem is made even worse by the millions of exaggerated claims made by many diesel owners lying to friends and relatives.

But the fuel mileage reported by your friend in the earlier post was probably with a new engine, perhaps climbing, and maybe running against a headwind. It was certainly not fuel mileage to brag about but if anyone thinks that was bad, a gasoline powered 1/2 ton pulling the same trailer under the same conditions will be far worse.

 

[BILLUA]

Very unlikely for lots of reasons.



One, Chrysler is just recovering from a financial disaster and in this nobama economy sales and profits are good but not great and the economic future of the nation is uncertain at best. Chrysler's car line is stale and badly in need of new models which will cost hundreds of millions of dollars. Chrysler is unlikely to also undertake a major undertaking that will cost hundreds of millions of dollars to offer a diesel in the Ram 1500 now.



Secondly, a Ram 1500 diesel would take sales away from the Ram 2500s and Ram 3500s.



Third, many "think" or say they want a Ram 1500 diesel but it would have a price tag nearly equal to a Ram 2500 or 3500 so would buyers actually buy them? I have some doubts.



Fourth, diesel fuel is more expensive than gasoline and if nobama manages to steal this upcoming election he will drive diesel prices up even more. Tree huggers don't like diesels. They have no use for them on the streets of San Francisco, NY, or DC. What would sales predictions be for an expensive new Ram 1500?



Fifth, the United States government meaning the EPA and other bureaucracies, has for years taken an anti-diesel approach layering more taxes and more restrictive emission controls on them every several years. It will get worse if nobama is reelected.



A diesel 1/2 ton is not going to happen IMO.

Harvey, agree with all.



I will just add that the bias against diesels was made and increased under 8 years of Clinton and 8 Years of Bush.



Until this country comes out from under the influence of big oil -not likely- we are going to be behind the Europeans in having the practicality of the diesel auto being as prevalent here as they are in Europe.



I feel the greenies and big oil share the blame with the aforementioned administrations.

 

[Wingate]

That's even worse than I assumed.



I know many are buying new Gen IV Ram diesels expecting the fuel economy of the '90s when the 12 valves or VP-44 24 valves with no emissions crap produced fuel mileage as high as 18 to 20 mpg. The problem is made even worse by the millions of exaggerated claims made by many diesel owners lying to friends and relatives.



But the fuel mileage reported by your friend in the earlier post was probably with a new engine, perhaps climbing, and maybe running against a headwind. It was certainly not fuel mileage to brag about but if anyone thinks that was bad, a gasoline powered 1/2 ton pulling the same trailer under the same conditions will be far worse.

The truck in question has just under 15K miles on it... . coming back from Galveston several months ago, TBH, I was pushing him pretty hard, I was running between 75 and 80 and he was constantly playing catch-up. I know, not really smart, but I was sick of hearing about how great it was with 400 hp!. . ... . The truck had just had a new turbo put on it at 4700 miles on that trip.

The fuel mileage when towing has been dropping ever since new... initially we thought it was due to the turbo failure...

Honestly, I dont think a properly geared 3/4 ton would do much worse pulling the same load... it would DEFINITELY be cheaper to maintain vs. the new 2012-2013 diesels...

 

[HBarlow]

Harvey, agree with all.

I will just add that the bias against diesels was made and increased under 8 years of Clinton and 8 Years of Bush.

Until this country comes out from under the influence of big oil -not likely- we are going to be behind the Europeans in having the practicality of the diesel auto being as prevalent here as they are in Europe.

I feel the greenies and big oil share the blame with the aforementioned administrations.

European cars and trucks burn gasoline and diesel fuel also don't they? Why is it that major oil companies don't have "influence" governments in those nations as some believe they do here?

 

[HBarlow]

The truck in question has just under 15K miles on it... . coming back from Galveston several months ago, TBH, I was pushing him pretty hard, I was running between 75 and 80 and he was constantly playing catch-up. I know, not really smart, but I was sick of hearing about how great it was with 400 hp!. . ... . The truck had just had a new turbo put on it at 4700 miles on that trip.
The fuel mileage when towing has been dropping ever since new... initially we thought it was due to the turbo failure...
Honestly, I dont think a properly geared 3/4 ton would do much worse pulling the same load... it would DEFINITELY be cheaper to maintain vs. the new 2012-2013 diesels...

There have been several former TDR members who have returned to TDR after a brief and disappointing flirtation with a gasoline engine pickup. The came back because they were disappointed.

My last gas pickup was a '94 Ford F-250HD w/fuel injected 460 V8. It was a very tough old engine designed for work with a torque peak down low at 2400 rpm. At the time I owned an Airstream travel trailer which weighed about 9,000 lbs. The Furd would pull it but any grade at all had it down in second gear or even low and fuel mileage was terrible empty or towing. A short steep grade just north of Post, TX on US-84 southeast of Lubbock would drop it to second gear for the entire climb even when I charged out of post at full throttle gaining speed. My '01 Ram w/HO six speed and 3. 54 gear would pull it in overdrive, or direct if a slow truck held me back on the approach.

So-called hemi V8s in current Rams (which are not hemis) are short stroke gas motors. The brochures claim 400 ft. lbs. of torque but peak torque occurs somewhere around 3500 rpm which means when you are pulling the slightest grade the auto transmission will downshift until the engine reaches 3500 rpm.

If you think your buddie's Gen IV Ram w/Cummins gets poor fuel mileage pulling a trailer try making that trip he made trying to keep up with you at 75 to 80 mph with a trailer on try a hemi. A gas engine will give you about 4 or 5 mpg doing that.

The modern fi gas motors will return good gas mileage at a steady throttle in OD at 55 to 65 mph but anyone who needs a truck for pulling a travel trailer will be sorely disappointed because he won't be inside his shiny new Ram with all the interior bells and whistles very much, he'll be standing outside admiring it as he pumps gasoline into the tank at every gas station.

 

[Wingate]

So-called hemi V8s in current Rams (which are not hemis) are short stroke gas motors. The brochures claim 400 ft. lbs. of torque but peak torque occurs somewhere around 3500 rpm which means when you are pulling the slightest grade the auto transmission will downshift until the engine reaches 3500 rpm.



If you think your buddie's Gen IV Ram w/Cummins gets poor fuel mileage pulling a trailer try making that trip he made trying to keep up with you at 75 to 80 mph with a trailer on try a hemi. A gas engine will give you about 4 or 5 mpg doing that.

The 345 or 5. 7L Hemi is AWFULLY close to being a Hemispherical combustion chambered engine... . Dual Rocker shafts, centered sparkplug, center crowned piston... . not sure what else it needs to be considered a hemi...

I have one apart right now thats in an 04 Durango...



Harvey, the 6. 7L that my buddy owns is not a Cummins powered Ram, its a Scorpion powered 2012 Ford F250... sorry, thought I already made that clear, if I didn't, I apologize...

I still do not believe that a properly geared 3/4 ton gasser would get much worse than his truck is getting while pulling the same load... .

 

[HBarlow]

The 345 or 5. 7L Hemi is AWFULLY close to being a Hemispherical combustion chambered engine... . Dual Rocker shafts, centered sparkplug, center crowned piston... . not sure what else it needs to be considered a hemi...
I have one apart right now thats in an 04 Durango...

Harvey, the 6. 7L that my buddy owns is not a Cummins powered Ram, its a Scorpion powered 2012 Ford F250... sorry, thought I already made that clear, if I didn't, I apologize...
I still do not believe that a properly geared 3/4 ton gasser would get much worse than his truck is getting while pulling the same load... .

Thanks for correcting both. I haven't paid close attention to the Chrysler V8s so apparently they are a better engine than I realized. I thought they still have a single rocker shaft and offset spark plug. Guess I need to look at their websites.


As bad as your friend's Furd fuel mileage was on that trip I believe you will find a gasoline V8 will do worse under similar conditions. I like V8 gasoline engines fine for performance in relatively light weight cars. I don't think they can compare in a light truck for any towing.

 

[rscurtis]

AFAIK, the hemi also has dual ignition. On early versions, each double-legged coil shared a wasted spark with a cylinder 360* away in the firing order, so that if a coil went bad, all cylinders would still fire. I don't know if this is still done on later versions.