2014 things of interest

[Cummins12V98]

http://www.allpar.com/trucks/ram/2014-heavy-duty.html


Looks like a 2014 may be in my future!

Looks like the LongHauler is a go.

 

[TDickerson]

Not sure I understand the big deal with the 6. 4 since it barely puts out any more HP and Torque than the 5. 7. Maybe the newer design will withstand more heavy duty pulling than the 5. 7, I guess. My past experience with pulling with a gas engine still leaves me with requiring a diesel engine that for that task.

 

[Joseph Donnelly]

The 2014 3500 is virtually unchanged except for the air bag system, which I hope is an option and not standard. I wish they would put on a fuel cap! The 7" multi view instrument cluster would be better if they let us look at egt. As it is, why bother with it. You have to get an Edge Insight anyway. The Edge lets you look at 8 gauges at once.

 

[DClark]

Way to go Ram. It's about time a pickup is available with an air suspension as an option. Every long haul semi on the hiway has air ride. Why do we pickup drivers want to bounce along when air ride has been available for years on big trucks? Now if I could only afford one.
DClark

 

[rrl989]

I'm considering the 6. 4 as today's CTD pkg is a bit too complex for a shadetree mechanic like myself. Financially, even a low mpg gasser
may end up a cost saver in the long run. As far as a 6. 4 Gasser HP/TQ, it would be more than any V8 I've ever owned in the past and would
likely outperform the CTD in most areas other than towing/hauling. As a 90% daily driver, it something to consider, but I'll probably
buy a 14' CTD anyway just because "I can" !

 

[Joseph Donnelly]

The gas engines are no less complex, perhaps more complex than the Cummins. At sea level on the flats, a gasser is OK with a moderate weight trailer. Just don't ever take it to the real mountains!

 

[Bill Stockard]

The 2014 3500 is virtually unchanged except for the air bag system, which I hope is an option and not standard. I wish they would put on a fuel cap! The 7" multi view instrument cluster would be better if they let us look at egt. As it is, why bother with it. You have to get an Edge Insight anyway. The Edge lets you look at 8 gauges at once.

A replacement fuel fill inlet for use with the larger truck fill nozzles with a real cap would be an good item for an aftermarket business to invent. Guys at B-D, are you listening?

Bill

 

[rscurtis]

I'm considering the 6. 4 as today's CTD pkg is a bit too complex for a shadetree mechanic like myself. Financially, even a low mpg gasser
may end up a cost saver in the long run. As far as a 6. 4 Gasser HP/TQ, it would be more than any V8 I've ever owned in the past and would
likely outperform the CTD in most areas other than towing/hauling. As a 90% daily driver, it something to consider, but I'll probably
buy a 14' CTD anyway just because "I can" !

Any cost savings that you realize up front will be more than erased at resale. As far as performance is concerned, plot the HP and torque curve of the hemi and then draw a line across it at the 2800 RPM level and see how much HP and torque you really have available for normal driving. The hemi will not become competitive until it's running in the 4-6,000 RPM range.

 

[TDickerson]

The gas engines are no less complex, perhaps more complex than the Cummins. At sea level on the flats, a gasser is OK with a moderate weight trailer. Just don't ever take it to the real mountains!

I believe all the EPA mandated pollution stuff made the Cummins more complex than it needed to be. That seems to be the bulk of the problems people are experiencing at this time with numerous check engine lights. Hopefully that will be reduced with time and our experiences. I will agree that a gasser will pull a trailer as advertised as long as you stay within the weight allowances. But, you are so right, the first time you experience any real hills or inclines, the temperatures just sky rocket, and the truck just doesn't have what it takes. The first time I listened to an RV sales person about not having any problems pulling the RV with my gasser, I shortly afterward bought my 97 Dodge Diesel. I will never go back to a gasser for pulling.

 

[TJJEEPER]

Looks like you'd need to program the GPS for "NO U-TURNS" if you bought the Longhauler. Heck, I think a Mega 8' box would be too much.
For my money I'd like to see a 3500 Quad cab 8' box DRW. Just a tad shorter than my current crew.

 

[RustyJC]

I believe all the EPA mandated pollution stuff made the Cummins more complex than it needed to be. That seems to be the bulk of the problems people are experiencing at this time with numerous check engine lights.

We took delivery of our current truck on 9/11/10 and have yet to see a "check engine" light. Numerous check engine lights?? Ummmm..... OK, if you say so.



Having towed with a 1996 3500 with the 8. 0L V10 before I switched to Cummins-powered trucks, I just shake my head when someone wants to tow anything of significance with a gasser. Been there, done that and got the t-shirt to prove it!! :{



Rusty

 

[Bill Stockard]

Any cost savings that you realize up front will be more than erased at resale. As far as performance is concerned, plot the HP and torque curve of the hemi and then draw a line across it at the 2800 RPM level and see how much HP and torque you really have available for normal driving. The hemi will not become competitive until it's running in the 4-6,000 RPM range.

Yes, the 4,000+ RPM is where the power is as my brother discovered with his Ram/Hemi when towing his loaded gooseneck cattle trailer a couple of times a year for about 30 miles. He turns on the cruise control and lets it "scream" going up hills. He was so sick of his Ford F250/6. 4L PSD, he bought the Ram which is something he has never done. Fuel mileage on the two trucks is about the same; however, his maintenance and fuel costs are lower than the Ford. The duty cycle for his farm/ranch truck is much more compatible using a gasoline engine.

Hemi engine maintenance costs are much less than a '07. 5 thru '12 Ram/Cummins with heavy EGR/NOX converter, fuel dilution with short forced oil change intervals, required EGR cooler cleaning, etc. . Beginning with the '13 Ram/Cummins in combination with SCR, the comparable maintenance costs will probably be much closer.

Bill

 

[Joseph Donnelly]

The second gen club cab 8' bed had 155" wheelbase. First gen SB crew cabs and long bed club cabs had 149". Third gen long bed quad cabs about 160". With the bigger crew cab, more like the first gen crew cab, the sb has 149" and lb has 169". Megacab sb has about 160". The WB tells us a lot about turning circle.

 

[SNiebaum]

Yes, the 4,000+ RPM is where the power is as my brother discovered with his Ram/Hemi when towing his loaded gooseneck cattle trailer a couple of times a year for about 30 miles. He turns on the cruise control and lets it "scream" going up hills. He was so sick of his Ford F250/6. 4L PSD, he bought the Ram which is something he has never done. Fuel mileage on the two trucks is about the same; however, his maintenance and fuel costs are lower than the Ford.

fuel mileage on a HD Ram with 5. 7L Hemi pulling a trailer is comparable to a Ford with 6. 4L PSD??? This I gotta see...

I own a Ram 1500 Mega Cab 4x4 with a Hemi and the best it does unloaded is about 14mpg... you drive it in any amount of headwind or crosswind and you can easily dip down below 12mpg empty cruising on the highway... in a stiff Kansas headwind going thru the Flint Hills I've had it nearly down to 11mpg on the dot.

 

[Bill Stockard]

fuel mileage on a HD Ram with 5. 7L Hemi pulling a trailer is comparable to a Ford with 6. 4L PSD??? This I gotta see...



I own a Ram 1500 Mega Cab 4x4 with a Hemi and the best it does unloaded is about 14mpg... you drive it in any amount of headwind or crosswind and you can easily dip down below 12mpg empty cruising on the highway... in a stiff Kansas headwind going thru the Flint Hills I've had it nearly down to 11mpg on the dot.

Yep, that's his report. He tows his gooseneck livestock trailer no more than two or three times a year and for only 30-40 miles. He hires transportation for moving large numbers of livestock. He does a lot of slow driving (idling) in pastures checking/feeding cattle and driving on gravel county roads going from one farm to another. It's why so much trouble with the 6. 4L PSD and why I suggested he not to buy a Ram/Cummins with that type of driving or he would encounter the same type of problems with the Cummins 6. 7L. Also without a heavy diesel engine on the front axle, he discovered he has less problems getting stuck in the soft wet ground feeding cattle in winter and it could possibly result in fewer problems with the infamous Ram 4x4 drive and steering components over the life of the truck.



Bill

 

[Joseph Donnelly]

Hopefully the new DEF system will make the Rams much more amenable to idling and unloaded town and highway driving. Also, the upgraded 6000 lb rated front axle should help with durability.

 

[rscurtis]

fuel mileage on a HD Ram with 5. 7L Hemi pulling a trailer is comparable to a Ford with 6. 4L PSD??? This I gotta see...



I own a Ram 1500 Mega Cab 4x4 with a Hemi and the best it does unloaded is about 14mpg... you drive it in any amount of headwind or crosswind and you can easily dip down below 12mpg empty cruising on the highway... in a stiff Kansas headwind going thru the Flint Hills I've had it nearly down to 11mpg on the dot.

The 6. 4 engine, while not as problematic as what preceded it, (and possibly what followed), was not noted for fuel economy. The twin-turbo setup ran very high manifold pressures which probably contributed to the poor fuel economy. It was even worse than the early 6. 7 Cummins, and it wasn't meeting 2010 NOX standards as the Cummins was. If you really had to have that "Built Ford Tough" truck, you were probably better off with the V10 and hope it didn't spit any spark plugs.