2004.5 engine output

[willie]

A dealer has told me to wait until early December, then order a 2004. 5 Ram T. D. truck. They say it has 325 HP and 600 fp torque, and is legal in all the states (I'm in California).



Does anyone know about this engine? (And it's extra EGR stuff. ) Should I wait for this "bigger" engine, or go ahead and order what's now available?



I need some information ASAP as I'm ready to purchase my new truck now. Thank you for your assistance.

 

[mdepot]

This is the first I've heard of this power increase. I'm in the same boat, ready to place an order now, but not sure if I should wait. If anyone has news of this, I'd be glad to hear the details also.

 

[abledog]

round and round she goes where she stops nobody knows!

 

[JLockhart]

Originally posted by willie

A dealer has told me to wait until early December, then order a 2004. 5 Ram T. D. truck. They say it has 325 HP and 600 fp torque, and is legal in all the states (I'm in California).



Does anyone know about this engine? (And it's extra EGR stuff. ) Should I wait for this "bigger" engine, or go ahead and order what's now available?



I need some information ASAP as I'm ready to purchase my new truck now. Thank you for your assistance.

I've read rumors here about increased numbers on the EGR engine. I wanted the non-EGR and have mine on order already. But since you're in California, you can't get the HO as it is, so it sounds like the 2004. 5 is what you've been waiting for.

 

[BDog]

This is what I have also heard from a reliable source in Chrysler. I hear it will be only offered in the HO and 50 state legal. 325 hp with 600 ft pd torque. Most likely will have a cat, looks like no egr...

 

[XcumminsX]

:{ that sucks for us 2003/2004 guys:{ i wonder if we all go to the dealer if they will reflash our computers when this comes into effect. i heard thats what chevy will be doing in a couple years

 

[KCJackson]

If indeed the 325/600 rating is true, lemme do some math for you folks... 325 hp @3000 rpm translates to 569 lb-ft of torque, higher than the 6. 0 Powerstroke's PEAK torque at 2000 rpm.



When I get my 2005, I want to drive my 1996 for a few miles, then hop immediately into the 05. Something tells me I won't be concerned about 4. 10s; the 3. 73s will be JUUUUUUUUUST fine...

 

[2003Cummins4Me]

i hope bdog is right about the cat... from what ive heard its going to be egr but i guess there might be hope for cat only

 

[Phil Howell]

I don't believe Ford's claimed output #'s and probably GM's and DC's are suspect too. When I was at the magazine, you wouldn't believe how well some of the press loaners ran. I had a '94 Ram V10 4x4 that got a minimum of 16 mpg, no matter how fast we ran it. It also ran like a raped ape. After reporting this to friends who ran out and purchased V10 Rams, I had to run for cover, because none of the "regular" off-the-lot trucks came near to our press loaner's performance.

 

[willie]

Does the possible EGR affect only the 2004. 5 models, or is it possible on ALL 2004 models?

 

[SLinse]

my 04 does not have the EGR. It will be interesting to see what happens. I can't beleive how many changes DC makes to there new vehciles, especially in mid-year production.

 

[mdepot]

Blame CARB and company...

 

[DLeno]

All the engines built into trucks shipped after January 1, 2004 must meet new Federal standards for NOx and PPMs. The Federal EPA standards coming in January are the same standards in existance today in CA.



There will be no HO trucks sold anywhere in the U. S. if DC doesn't meet the emissions. which of course they will, in my opinion.

 

[Big MAK]

I'm suspisious; having been victimized by the first batch of ISB's (98. 5) that supposedly had more power then the 12V they replaced (NOT). I'm thinking the EGR equipped engine has to "make more power" in order to have any hope of putting the same amount of power to the rear wheels. It's all in how it's measured. But if I was in California that would be a different issue; EGR equipped and making H. O. numbers (hopefully) at the rear wheels -- that'd be nice in that market -- and I'm all for cleaner air; etc. But making our little trucks meet all these EPA specs is incredibly stupid when I look at all the city trucks and buses blowing more noxious chemicals in a day then a tuned up CTD will in a lifetime.



The point is; IMO (could be wrong) I wouldn't wait for a "higher output" EGR equipped ISBe. I don't think it will happen; it's common sense. Burning 'dirty' recirculated air isn't going to make more power then burning clean air. As the technology gets better and better the new EGR equipped engines will eventually surpass current engines -- but unlikely in the early releases and definitely at the cost of more stuff to break at greater complexity to enhance.

 

[DLeno]

Well, clearly the emmissions related motivation for progress is not the best. you make an good point but I'd expect that the measured (at the flywheel) torque and HP would still be a fair comparison, since the losses in the drivetrain would not change from what they are today.



What makes it confusing is when there are higher rpms associated with a higher HP. then its hard to evaluate the numbers into real drivability differences.



BTW, anyone claiming to have heard a DC claim about the new engine specs is either lying or about to get in trouble with DC. The press release about the new engines is to occur in November and DC has not (to date) released ANY information about the new engines. It will be interesting to see what the new TDR magazine has to say

 

[nickleinonen]

Originally posted by willie

Does the possible EGR affect only the 2004. 5 models, or is it possible on ALL 2004 models?

my 2004 as far as i can see, has no egr system

 

[DLeno]

no 2004. 5 engines have shipped yet. For those who have 2004 trucks, read the spec plate on the drivers side of the engine -- it says it meets standards for the 2003 model year.

 

[brillmtb]

My service dealer said that the next version will be 325hp/600ft lbs but then he also said the following



1. He has never heard of our trucks pulling to the right

2. He has been putting on exhaust brakes on 03's like my HO and didnt know anything about the fact that DC does not advise



So who do you believe?

 

[Casey Balvert]

Given that rumors are just that and DC's claims are typically not much better, if I was contemplating a new truck I would be buying a pre Jan 1st. At least you KNOW what you are getting. Even it they come out with an extra 20 horses as the rumors say, I doubt if you would notice it in the seat of the pants anyway. And what about the effect of the new emissions systems on fuel mileage and maintenance? Look at the maintenance intervals for CA. Too many unknowns. That is why I bought the 2003 as recommended in the TDR several issues back. I have not heard of many performance complaints about the current HO. Lots of power and great mileage. And it tows my fiver real nice. And it is a known entity. What more could you ask for. My two cents.



Casey

 

[Dean Upson]

Originally posted by Casey Balvert

Given that rumors are just that and DC's claims are typically not much better, if I was contemplating a new truck I would be buying a pre Jan 1st. At least you KNOW what you are getting. Even it they come out with an extra 20 horses as the rumors say, I doubt if you would notice it in the seat of the pants anyway. And what about the effect of the new emissions systems on fuel mileage and maintenance? Look at the maintenance intervals for CA. Too many unknowns. That is why I bought the 2003 as recommended in the TDR several issues back. I have not heard of many performance complaints about the current HO. Lots of power and great mileage. And it tows my fiver real nice. And it is a known entity. What more could you ask for. My two cents.



Casey

Amen, Brother Casey .



Dean