2012 Changes

[RonD]

Does anyone know when the 2012 changes will start leaking out?, I would think about mid March.

 

[HBarlow]

Ron,

Why does everyone expect "changes" for MY2012?

Dodge introduced a new engine and transmission for MY2007 and a complete new bodystyle for MY2010. In a period of a very weak economy and slow sales I wouldn't expect any changes.

 

[rscurtis]

Your logic is correct. But, I remember several years ago some of the Ford sites saying the new engine would be 400HP and 750 ft/lb of torque. "No way," I thought to myself. How did that turn out?



Personally, I'd like to see Ram go to SCR like Ford and GM, and offer two HP options: 300 HP with improved FE for normal users, and 400 HP for those who want bragging rights, but really need a true MD truck for what they want to do.

 

[RonD]

What I would like to see is the 8 speed trans there talking about, and a few more horses under the hood, without that it is fine the way they are, but the big issue with Dodge at this time is fuel economy, both GM and Ford have a big advantage with better mileage, in my case it would equal about 2 mpg, that equals $750 a year, I would like to keep it 10 years, $7500 makes a difference. If they would go with the SRC emmisions systems, cut back on the EGR, the increase should be there, then get a trans that will take the added power. I also would like to see power extending mirrors, and a real trailer brake controller with hydraulic interface. Car companies make good money on HD trucks, Dodge is getting slaughtered by GM and Ford, a shame, but if they want to sell, they have to be competitive, so I will sit back and see what is happening for 2012, a lot I hope.

 

[TDickerson]

Dodge has to address the regeneration issue with the fuel dilution that is happening. They have got to get away from dumping fuel in the cylinders for this and need to do what GM did with the 9th injector straight to the filter. This should give us better fuel mileage along with the SRC, and Urea like everyone else. That's what I would like to see happen and that would definitely make my mind up to buy another Dodge.

 

[Jim W]

Gentlemen, this will not happen until the next round of emission compliance is required by the EPA. My reasoning is the cost of testing and certifying the engine by Cummins, to meet the emission duty cycle set forth by the EPA. This cost is in the millions of dollars and the engine manufacture needs time to recoupe their R&D cost along with the operating expense of making a new engine. The increase horsepower to the current 6. 7L, 350 HP engine would be a new engine with cooling and emission design changes required by the EPA and Cummins.



Every time a change is made to a certified engine that effects the emission compliance certificate. That change must be retested and recertify to meet the duty cycle set forth by the EPA. Design and testing cost money. So I do not think there will be changes until the new emission compliance rules are set forth for compliance.

Jim

 

[EGroeneveld]

I'll tell you I thought of waiting for a 2012 upgrade after seeing the 8 speed, 400/800+ rumors, but glad I just went ahead and ordered and received a 2011. Compared to my 2005, there are lots of improvements. I love the new truck.



And really this truck pulls my 8k loaded enclosed trailers as fast as I need to. I can keep up with traffic and easily go above the speed limit. Soaped up numbers likely just reduce my mileage anyways. I'll see in a few months how it does at max ratings with slidein camper and my enclosed trailer.



Man I am starting to sound old

 

[AH64ID]

While those of us with a Cummins realize that there is more to a trucks "power" than numbers not everyone is that way. Dodge (RAM) is going to have to do something to equal the power, on paper, of the Ford and GM products. It does effect their sales.

There have been lots of rumors floating around, 8 speed auto, 7 speed manual, SCR, twin's, etc. So it will be interesting to see what, if any, are true... Personally I'm hoping for a 7 speed manual with 2 OD's, one for towing one for empty cruise.

They aren't due for a change, but the competition changed and they need to follow if they want to keep their sales up.

I have also read that there won't be any further emissions restrictions on the trucks, at least for a long time, as the current standards are about as fine as can be tested. In fact most emissions (at least around here) can't even sniff the diesels, they just do a visual inspection, OBDII read, and a snap throttle test for smoke.

 

[rscurtis]

You are correct, there are no new standards on the way, emissions are at basically zero now. Cummins chose their emissions strategy with the NOX adsorber system before the Punishment Agency had approved the use of SCR, which requires participation by the truck operator. They should be given credit for being able to meet the standards three years ahead of schedule, and three years ahead of Ford and GM.



SCR has since been approved by the PA, and is the better strategy than the adsorber system. It is time for Ram and Cummins to go this way, not to keep up with the competition, but to realize the FE benefits it offers. They have already done it on the C&C, so it is not impossible.



Any future emission reductions will be for CO2, which is nothing more than a fuel economy standard.

 

[amsoilman]

I think in early 2011, around february, you will see some cahnges to the Dodge(RAM) pickups, such as powered folding mirrors as well as more power in the Cummins engines. I have been told this by a very knowledgeable person in the Dodge/cummins industry.

 

[AH64ID]

SCR can do great things, it may be a PITA at first (Nice to let GM and Ford pave that road), but it will be good in the end (a necessary evil albeit, but not as bad as it could be)

 

[Babyfat]

How about a 8' "RAM BOX" and a built in 10k generator

 

[WMoroni]

SCR can do great things, it may be a PITA at first (Nice to let GM and Ford pave that road), but it will be good in the end (a necessary evil albeit, but not as bad as it could be)

Dodge already has it on the C&Cs. Not a pain at all. 6000 miles and I've poured in 3. 5 gallons of def, oil level is still good, no change oil light yet, matter of fact zero issues.



Now for the drawbacks, the mileage still sucks, overall about 3. 5mpg worse than my 07, 5. 9 auto I traded, and it has less power to boot. I've almost gotten ran over a couple times so far because the truck is so much slower than the 5. 9 was. Punch it at the stop light and it eases along. Punch the old truck and it would spin the tires trying to go. It's not underpowered but it doesn't have any extra. I was hoping for better mileage with the SCR but it's not there plus DEF is $4/gal.

 

[AfterBurner]

Now for the drawbacks, the mileage still sucks, overall about 3. 5mpg worse than my 07, 5. 9 auto I traded, and it has less power to boot. I've almost gotten ran over a couple times so far because the truck is so much slower than the 5. 9 was. Punch it at the stop light and it eases along. Punch the old truck and it would spin the tires trying to go. It's not underpowered but it doesn't have any extra. I was hoping for better mileage with the SCR but it's not there plus DEF is $4/gal.

I'm glad to see someone else with a c&c has had the same experiences. I've learned to be more patient when getting into traffic, this truck does not hussle out there... but then I went from a bombed single cab 2500 stick to a stock crew cab dually slushbox, so it's what I expected. Although it did take off hard enough to dump off the 2 gallon DEF bottle I had on the bed



I too thought we would see a fuel mileage benefit with the urea, not so.

 

[CBlack]

Interesting reading and so many people have been bragging about urea and its benefits.

 

[rscurtis]

The use of urea will not give any MPG benefit over a 5. 9 engine. Its benefit applies to the earlier 6. 7 engines with the NOX adsorber catalyst.



Earlier C&C trucks did not use the adsorber system or the EGR cooler bypass, hence their few problems with the emission control system compared to the PU.



The current PU engine would benefit from the use of urea, IMO. Right now, there is no apple to apple comparison for FE, unless you count the improved FE that Ford and GM claim in their newer trucks.

 

[RustyJC]

The current PU engine would benefit from the use of urea, IMO. Right now, there is no apple to apple comparison for FE, unless you count the improved FE that Ford and GM claim in their newer trucks.

IIRC, the engine manufacturers are claiming that DEF (urea) is worth about a 4-5% improvement in fuel economy in over-the-road truck applications due to the ability to reduce EGR and advance injection timing to improve engine efficiency and then let the urea take care of the resulting NOx after the fact.



Rusty

 

[Beast2B]

There's been a couple of magazine comparisons that agree with the claims that the GM and Ford trucks with DEF (and higher rated power) get better mpg. Not entirely scientific, but accurate enough to consider it realistic to me. Now, I still believe the Cummins long block is WAY ahead of the others in brute strength, so I'll stick with 6.

 

[gtoli]

Ron,



Why does everyone expect "changes" for MY2012?

Harvey, I think it's mentioned somewhere in the Mayan calander

:-laf

 

[RonD]

The Ford and GM Diesels are getting about 20% better MPG than the current Cummins does, they are both more modern designed engines, I don't know if Cummins can tweak the inline six any more, its the best of all 3 without question, but trying to get more power and MPG may be a challenge. I remember when Chevy came out with the gas LS1 5. 3 to replace the old 350 small block, the small block has always been a winner, but technology and emissions requirements took over, I think this will be the same with the inline 6, but Cummins is a big smart company, they have something under wraps for sure, they are also growing, a new hire of over 700 Engineers so I understand, something good is on the way.