Here I am

2013 DRW/Aisin and 3.42 Question?

Attention: TDR Forum Junkies
To the point: Click this link and check out the Front Page News story(ies) where we are tracking the introduction of the 2025 Ram HD trucks.

Thanks, TDR Staff

5th Wheel Hitch

Should I be disappointed?

Status
Not open for further replies.
If trailer weight is comfortably within the rating for 3. 42s, meaning well under 17K, all you lose with those gears is some quickness to takeoff, and possibly the need to be in 5th instead of 6th while towing. When solo, you will like the 3. 42 for sure.
 
What is the RPM @ 70 mph in 6th with the 3. 42 and 3. 73? I believe my 12 valve peak torque is around 1800?



Still trying to get my mind wrapped around this. We used to think peak torque was an indication of a reasonable/best MPG.



Hate to keep asking, just haven't heard of any real world numbers.
 
Assuming Aisin or 68RFE (. 63 6th gear) transmission and 235/80R17 tires:

3. 42 - 1594
3. 73 - 1739

Peak torque on the 6. 7L is usually quoted at 1600, sometimes at 1650, and in the latest fleet brochure it's quoted at 1600-2000 RPM, which I thought was interesting...
 
Last edited:
The Ram Powertrain Integration Manager explained to me that the Cummins 6. 7 is happy and efficient from 1200-2000 rpm. He said it would be better to tow at 1800-2000 than to downshift and get 2500 rpm.
 
The Ram Powertrain Integration Manager explained to me that the Cummins 6. 7 is happy and efficient from 1200-2000 rpm. He said it would be better to tow at 1800-2000 than to downshift and get 2500 rpm.

That's interesting info. I'd sure like to talk with him. Not only that, but I wish he'd talk with whoever does the PowerSpec program, because it doesn't seem to me they're on the same page. It says, in their gearing guidelines for vehicles under 10,000 lbs. under GVW and vehicles in the 10,000-30,000 GVW range, that:
1. Recommended RPM range at target cruise speed: 1900-2400 RPM
2. Recommended RPM at cruise speed for best Fuel Economy or Economy/Power Balance: 2150 RPM
3. Engine speeds of less than 1900 RPM at cruise speed or 1600 RPM at 55 MPH should be avoided

In some respects, they're similar, but there's no justification whatsoever in the recommendations for pulling any kind of a load at any rpm under 1900 (unless it were at 55 mph, when 1600 is ok?). It's puzzled me greatly for a long time, especially the 2150 best fuel economy statement, so much so that I had to just decide they don't even know themselves what's best. (Try getting their recommendations to jive with any axle ratio other than 4. 10, for example - unless you tow heavy at over 80 mph, you're breaking the rules. Of course, towing heavy at over 80 mph is breaking some other rules, too, and I think they're probably more important... )
 
I haven't pulled more than about 4500 lb and that was in town. I forgot to use Tow/Haul mode and couldn't even tell it was back there, with 3. 42s. With a heavy trailer, I suppose between T/H mode and locking out 6th, there would be no issues.
 
As explained in TDR Issue 80, p. 58, Ram is going all out to improve mpg. Axle disconnect and 3. 42s are two benefits to us (lower engine rpm, so long as sufficient to pull the load, means lower wear per mile). A lot of my driving is solo and it is nice getting back close to 20 mpg, which was hard to achieve even with my 1997 12-valve.
 
Joe, as you say, it has to be about mileage. But to then say that, at 10,000 lbs. GVW, the best Economy RPM is 2150, contradicts the notion of 3. 42's altogether. As I said, I just gave up. There's no reconciling the recommendations with the real world, as far as I can tell. (BTW Joe, I bought a really really good clutch from you way back in 1999 for my '93 with NV5600... )

GSchlegel, I went with the 3. 73's for that very reason. If I need to drive a little slower to get the MPG I want, I can do that. But first and foremost, I want the truck to be able to pull what I need it to, without fear of damaging stuff.
 
I went with the 3. 73's for that reason. I do tow a 19,000# GVW toyhauler, so have both weight and big front to contend with. If I lived in mountainous area, I would go with 4. 10. 3. 42 just seems too high for these needs.

I am going to pick it up this afternoon! '14 Longhorn DRW with Aisin and 3. 73.
 
I think 3. 73 is the perfect ratio for 90% of the 3500 crowd. 5% just want the idea of a diesel and have nothing to tow. 3. 43 is perfect. 5% use their trucks for pulling heavy loads exclusively and the 4. 10's are perfect for them. The other 90% of us pull heavy at times, and are unloaded a fair portion of the time. 3. 73 is perfect for that. I now wish I had 3. 73's instead of 4. 10's after towing. I can take a couple of extra shifts (so can the Aisin) for the nicer unloaded ride. Personally I would never have the 3. 42's but to each their own.
 
I went with the 3. 73's for that reason. I do tow a 19,000# GVW toyhauler, so have both weight and big front to contend with. If I lived in mountainous area, I would go with 4. 10. 3. 42 just seems too high for these needs.

I am going to pick it up this afternoon! '14 Longhorn DRW with Aisin and 3. 73.

NICE! The first 14 I have heard of.
 
Is driving at max gvwr similar to towing heavy? Is carrying a 5K lb truck camper similar to towing a rolling 10K lb trailer?

I ask because I have never towed, but need max gvwr with a slide-on camper. I have been caught in some bad situations accelerating, and maintaining speed in the mountains with my 12V and 3. 55 ratio. Promised myself/family "Never Again". Best mpg is important when empty, but having the abilities of a 3500, even if I need it only 20% of the time is important to me also. I've been reading from the 3. 42 crowd, but I'm starting to move towards at least the 3. 73s with the 300mm rear axle. It's not like I can try out both, and I only get one shot at it as I place the order.
 
NICE! The first 14 I have heard of.

Here is a pic of it on dealers lot, waiting for some things to go on Monday, picking up tuesday! Woohoo!

3. 73 Aisin Longhorn Crewcab Longbox, 5th wheel prep

image.jpg
 
Looks nice, great minds think alike! Cannot wait to drive it. Bet it handles the 19,000# toyhauler with ease. My 04 2500 converted to dually did fine, but I bet this will be a dream!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top