2012 ram hd???

[rlambert94]

I want to trade up to the new 2011. 5 hd, but have heard that ram is due for major mods in 2012. Any information on this?

 

[HBarlow]

Why would Ram introduce a new body style in 2012? The body style of current trucks was new in 2010.

The '94 body style sold through 2002. The Gen III was in use from 2003 through 2009.

 

[RustyJC]

Dodge HD trucks normally lag 1 model year behind the 1500 series trucks in major generational changes. For example, the 1500 moved from the 2nd generation to the 3rd generation body style in 2002, while the 2500 and 3500 did not change over to the 3rd generation until 2003. This holds true for the move from the 3rd to the 4th generation as well - 2009 for the 1500, 2010 for the 2500 and 3500.



When you see the 1500 make a major change, then you can pretty well figure that the HD trucks will lag by 1 year.



Rusty

 

[rlambert94]

I had just remember reading on, I think on allpar's website that the the hd rams would undergo major mods in 2012. Maybe the high output is it and it just showed up a yr early.

 

[rscurtis]

It could also be the change to SCR for NOX control and the introduction of the rumored 8-speed auto. HB is correct, you won't see a new body at this stage of the game.

 

['strokeThis_'07]

Cummins isn't going to urea in the pickups. And there is no 8 speed auto for the HD diesel pickups. Period.



They may do a styling change/update, but that's it. Although I would think the styling upgrade would be a couple years off, like 2013 at the earliest, 2014/15 more likely.

 

[rlambert94]

I agree with all the above, just asking.

 

[LHarper]

I think if you want a new HD without urea, you have ten months left to get one.

 

[NavyDood]

Cummins isn't going to urea in the pickups. And there is no 8 speed auto for the HD diesel pickups. Period.

They may do a styling change/update, but that's it. Although I would think the styling upgrade would be a couple years off, like 2013 at the earliest, 2014/15 more likely.

No urea = Big mistake. Bluetec is old technology already. Dodge may be upping the power but is behind in MPG now that Ford and GM are on DEF. I wouldn't be surprised if the new engine gets worse mileage than the current 07. 5 trucks. Only saving grace will be a much tighter transmission with the mods they are doing to it to utilize the power more efficiently.

8-speed could be in the not so distant future. They are vamping up the Kokomo plant where the 68rfe is built to start building the 8-speed. It is already being used in a BMW and Rolls Royce and will be going in one of the Dodge cars. The way the 8-speed transmission is currently built, it is only shy of handling the Cummins torque by 300 ft-lbs.

 

[DHuffman]

No urea = Big mistake. Bluetec is old technology already. Dodge may be upping the power but is behind in MPG now that Ford and GM are on DEF.

You have to add in the cost of the DEF to perform a mileage comparison between the two technologies. I have not seen enough data yet to determine which method has the lowest operating cost.



It is not old tech: the other two use the same principles, but still have to add urea to comply. They all have EGR coolers and DPFs.

 

[WMoroni]

Don't forget Dodge does use DEF in the C&C trucks. Sorry, my fuel mileage isn't any better than a regular dually, about 11. 5mpg, plus I have to add DEF. My DEF use has avgeraged 600mpg so far. The DEF cost 4. 99/gal at O'Rilley's. Adding DEF doesn't increase the fuel mileage, just decreases the amount of egr needed and does away with the nac. Just a side note, John Deere is staying away from the DEF while Case/NewHolland is going to use it. Most of the medium frame case tractors use the 6. 7 cummins.

 

['strokeThis_'07]

I have no desire to have DEF. I'm still not sold that that is the better way to go. I've yet to see any solid numbers showing the other trucks get that much better mileage. You have one guy saying "I get 23mpg all day long" and another with the exact same truck getting 13. I'm skeptical that that 23 is either from the digital meter, or someone that gets less touting more because they just spent a huge chunk of money on the same or worse mileage.



The 8 speed will be in the Durango, Jeep Grand Cherokee, Charger, 300, Challenger, and probably the 1500 Ram. There is also a front drive variant that may get it as well, and the 8 speed also has an AWD version. Hello 2012 Challenger SRT8 AWD!!! That would be awesome!



The 68rfe has only been used 5 years. That's an aweful short life for such an expensive R&D venture

 

[rscurtis]

According to the Diesel Technology Forum, SCR is yielding significant FE gains in OTR trucks compared to 2007. 5 trucks. As the cost of fuel increases and the cost of DEF comes down, the difference will be even more pronounced. There is also less load on the cooling system with the reduced EGR.



I still think there is a market for a 250-300HP/500-600 TQ engine for those of us who don't have to get to the store ten seconds sooner or maintain 80 MPH while towing a fiver over the mountains. My signature truck running on just 3 cylinders would have enough power for most normal driving situations.

 

[HBarlow]

... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .

I still think there is a market for a 250-300HP/500-600 TQ engine for those of us who don't have to get to the store ten seconds sooner or maintain 80 MPH while towing a fiver over the mountains. My signature truck running on just 3 cylinders would have enough power for most normal driving situations.

The 305/610 output of my detuned C&C ISB6. 7 is certainly adequate for my needs.

I wanted a little more and added Bosch/Cummins 275hp RV injectors to my '01 HO 6spd which was delivered with 245/510 IIRC.

 

[RustyJC]

I've yet to run into a situation that 350/650 hasn't handled just fine. I'm sure the 350/800 will be nice, but I don't know that I'll miss not having it.



Rusty

 

[Seane1987]

DEF is the way to go. In time they will figure out the proper calibrations for the ECM and Fuel Mileage will go up. Detroit has a 14. 8 liter engine that is capable of 9 mpg in loaded trucks, some are getting more. There's no reason that Dodge shouldn't be able to get 18 mpg consistently. The DEF system also makes the EGR system work alot less, generally speaking a 2010 spec truck without SCR runs at cruising speed with the EGR valve open 50-60%, the same truck with SCR runs maybe 5%. That in turn reduces soot loading of the EGR cooler and the DPF, which in turn means less EGR system maintenance and less regeneration. Were not seeing the EGR cooler failure rate we saw with the earlier engines either. The EGR system is kept in place as a "fail-safe" if the driver were to continue driving with no def or def system faults. When and if I buy a new truck, I hope it has the DEF system on it. I would really prefer it was just a good ole engine like my current truck, but thats the box the EPA has put us in...

 

[DEM123]

Amen to that Rusty!! More than most need by far.

 

[TWenske]

My 07 6. 7 Mega 4x4 deleted gets 21mpg going 60, a new 800 deleted should get 21mpg plus don't you think?

 

[HBarlow]

Sure, it may even get 25 or 30 mpg if you measure fuel consumption while coasting down a long grade.

Realistically, no, none of them will deliver that kind of fuel economy with real world testing.

 

[EDankievitch]

Having talked with people that the new Ford's with the DEF system the concencces is they'd rather buy the DEF and get the better MPG than the other way around A few of the people that I've spoke with that take the Ferry I'm on are reporting MPG around 18-20 highway with the Fords everyone with the Dodge is reporting around 12-16 MPG with the Reg Bluetec system. Hmmm $4. 50 a gal for fuel I think I'd rather pay $5 a gal for DEF that you use about a gal of every 1000-2000 miles than get worse MPG... Just a thought.