Here I am

6.7 Fuel MPG

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

Electronic Throttle Control Light (ETC)

Regen and Mileage

Status
Not open for further replies.
Drove to Grand Juntion and back, today -- a trip of 220 miles -- and put the cruise control on 55 mph. Averaged 18. 6 mpg during the trip, with about a third of that mixed city driving and the rest highway (I-70).



The truck is now fitted with a Warn 16,000 winch strapped to an ARB bumper (which ain't "aerodynamic"), so I'm pretty sure this rig will crack 20 mpg on long trips when we're into summer fuel situations and warmer temps. Still in the low twenties at night here in the mountains, and still pumping winter fuel.



Truck just turned 900 miles on the odometer.
 
Thanks, please keep us posted.



I had a feeling that the fuel economy on the new engine, despite its size and emissions paraphernalia, was going to comparable to, or better than, the 5. 9's with the 4-speed auto.
 
There's definitely a "sweet spot" in these engine/drivetrains, fuel-efficiency-wise. My Ram is happiest turning about 1500 rpms and just loafing along. Less than that, and she bogs down, and fuel numbers suffer, almost as though I was pushing 2500 and running much faster.

I suspect most owners have found the same thing, but this is running "empty," with just my hand tools, and I haven't towed enough, yet, to speculate about the news '07 model rigs' performance in tow-haul mode.

The six-speed is sweet, though, and I gotta believe that it's helping -- despite all the EPA junk -- to keep the mpg numbers up.

I talked to Gina Chappel's (Mark was on another phone) and she said that TST PRoducts, Inc. has an '07 6. 7 truck that's never left their shop since the day it arrived. It's been their "test and research bed," and Mark ordered another six-speed auto for Gina to use as her personal drive-around vehicle, though it hasn't arrived yet.

TST is focusing on developing a fueling (economy/power) solution for the new trucks, and Gina said they hoped to bring something to market later on this summer.

I admire Mark's patient approach, and know he won't sell something unless it's safe, dependable, and gives bang for the buck.
 
First off Consumer reports hates diesels, plus the don't know how to drive them. When they were doing the TDI on TV I was amazed they keep reving it like a little 4 banger gasser. no wonder they were getting bad MPG. We all know you don't drive a diesel like a gas engine, no need to rev to the red line every time you shift.







Consumer Reports also hated Dodge, but they only test the 1/2 ton gasers. Since 3/4 ton and 1 ton diesels are so popular, why don't they test them?
 
Consumer Reports is a left-leaning publication, with a clear bias against any consumer product that's either: A) Bigger B) More expensive, or C) More Exclusive than "the common man" can afford, "needs" to fit in, or has access to.

In their infinite wisdom, they review only those products we "Should Own" as responsible members of the World Community (gag... ).

Group-think on steroids.

That's why CU (or Consumer Reports) is not the resource to rely upon whenever you want to read about the biggest, nicest, or most costly consumer product in any category.

The bias against Dodge diesels springs from this same mindset; it's partly that the writers are ignorant of the enormous improvements in diesel technology (see: widespread use in socialist Europe), but it's also owing to the fact that the average Columbia University professor (CU's "target audience") can't drive or park one of these rigs in New York City, and New York Times opinion-writers consider our rigs "gauche" and "red-neck"; they're not Volvos, after all.

Consumer Union writers have the same sort of mindset, going in, and regurgitate the same sort of swill, though it's dressed up in lots of self-serving verbiage that's intended to convince us of their humanistic concern for "the environment," "the less-fortunate," etc. , etc.

(Okay, glad I got THAT off my chest... )
 
Last edited:
Sasquatch - I really don't want to hijack anything (its not like this thread is already straying . . . ), so is there any chance you could post a couple pics of your ARB front in another thread?



As far as milage is concerned, my '05 always got just under 16 mpg on the overhead (too lazy to hand calc) and I am almost always unhitched and empty. I just figured my driving style dictated it. Now I am curious how the 6. 7 will do - also curious what truck to truck variation is like with supposedly identical trucks. I wonder if tighter tolerances on fuel injection, etc. , creates a system that varies more if something like an injector is slightly out of tolerance.
 
Consumer Reports is a left-leaning publication, with a clear bias against any consumer product that's either: A) Bigger B) More expensive, or C) More Exclusive than "the common man" can afford, "needs" to fit in, or has access to.



In their infinite wisdom, they review only those products we "Should Own" as responsible members of the World Community (gag... ).



Group-think on steroids.



That's why CU (or Consumer Reports) is not the resource to rely upon whenever you want to read about the biggest, nicest, or most costly consumer product in any category.



The bias against Dodge diesels springs from this same mindset; it's partly that the writers are ignorant of the enormous improvements in diesel technology (see: widespread use in socialist Europe), but it's also owing to the fact that the average Columbia University professor (CU's "target audience") can't drive or park one of these rigs in New York City, and New York Times opinion-writers consider our rigs "gauche" and "red-neck"; they're not Volvos, after all.



Consumer Union writers have the same sort of mindset, going in, and regurgitate the same sort of swill, though it's dressed up in lots of self-serving verbiage that's intended to convince us of their humanistic concern for "the environment," "the less-fortunate," etc. , etc.



(Okay, glad I got THAT off my chest... )







Good post, but why does Consumer Report evaluate Mercedes and Lexus, which are expensive cars?
 
Grizz-Meister,

These are confusing times, grasshopper.

Never question the master: All will be revealed to you in the fullness of time.

(in other words, I dunno... )

I haven't read CU's publications in a long time, so maybe they've changed their ways. I subscribed (okay, my wife did) to the magazine when we used to
rely on the magazine's research department to ferret out dealer-cost on new vehicles, before the advent of the internet, Edmunds.com, etc.

If they evaluate luxury cars, then I'm betting they're making that decision based, again, on countervailing factors, such as excellent safety, fuel efficiency, or whatever. My impression was that Consumer Reports will throw in the occasional Mercedes when they're comparing a particular class of cars, say "small sedans," but they won't have a feature that compares, for instance, luxury sedans across the board, based on creature comforts, handling, horse power, and that kind of thing.

You may be right, though, and cars might be one of several exceptions to the rule: I'm just making a "generalization," and generalizations are typically not too tough to riddle with holes. This one being no exception.

My not knowing what I'm talking about, however, shouldn't cause you question my rock-solid premise that CU (and their publications) are run by bed-wetting, pinko, San Franciscans with a hate-on for G. Dubya Bush.

:) :) :)
 
Last edited:
Consumer Reports is a left-leaning publication, with a clear bias against any consumer product that's either: A) Bigger B) More expensive, or C) More Exclusive than "the common man" can afford, "needs" to fit in, or has access to.



In their infinite wisdom, they review only those products we "Should Own" as responsible members of the World Community (gag... ).



Group-think on steroids.



That's why CU (or Consumer Reports) is not the resource to rely upon whenever you want to read about the biggest, nicest, or most costly consumer product in any category.



The bias against Dodge diesels springs from this same mindset; it's partly that the writers are ignorant of the enormous improvements in diesel technology (see: widespread use in socialist Europe), but it's also owing to the fact that the average Columbia University professor (CU's "target audience") can't drive or park one of these rigs in New York City, and New York Times opinion-writers consider our rigs "gauche" and "red-neck"; they're not Volvos, after all.



Consumer Union writers have the same sort of mindset, going in, and regurgitate the same sort of swill, though it's dressed up in lots of self-serving verbiage that's intended to convince us of their humanistic concern for "the environment," "the less-fortunate," etc. , etc.



(Okay, glad I got THAT off my chest... )



I concur with this post... .
 
As far as milage is concerned, my '05 always got just under 16 mpg on the overhead (too lazy to hand calc) and I am almost always unhitched and empty.



Translated: I have no idea what my real fuel economy was. :D



My 05 gets about 2 MPG lower than the overhead, generally speaking. On conservative driving thru 2 lane highways in moderate traffic, 50ish MPH average, I get about 19. 5 hand-calc'd. Get on the freeway, it drops to 17.
 
ARB Bumper on '07 Ram

Here's one more; I tried to lighten the bumper in Photoshop so you could see its outline a little better. The stock OEM bumper is gone... Difficult to really tell how cool it looks because of the lack of contrast with the dark shadows under truck.
 
Sasquatch - Wow man. That thing looks huge in pictures, and I am pretty sure pics don't do it justice. I like the design of the uprights - very cool.



AKaiser - Yes. Translated into sarcasm, that is what it would sound like. Linguistics major?
 
Damn!

You have singularly good taste, my friend.

Have you done (or considered doing) anything about your stock wheels and tires?

I have been switching over to studded snows in the winter, which makes a huge difference in the mountains.
I was wondering what the best winter set-up is for a dually. Around here, most of the guys running snow-plows
are driving 2500s with tall, narrow, studded tires. Wonder how these 3500s are on snow and ice...
 
Last edited:
Damn!



You have singularly good taste, my friend.



Have you done (or considered doing) anything about your stock wheels and tires?



I have been switching over to studded snows in the winter, which makes a huge difference in the mountains.

I was wondering what the best winter set-up is for a dually. Around here, most of the guys running snow-plows

are driving 2500s with tall, narrow, studded tires. Wonder how these 3500s are on snow and ice...







No and I don't intend to make any changes. Prior to this dually I had a 95 dually, same flame red, and I never had a problem with ice and snow and that's with no added weight in the bed and not using 4X4. I will use 4WD if conditions get bad enough. I have really been amazed at the traction with only the limited slip.
 
Last edited:
MPG Update

I've been getting a consistent 16-17 mpg tooling around the Roaring Fork valley, mostly along Hwy 82, which features stoplights at 1-2 mile intervals.



This week, we traveled the two hundred miles to Denver, which is about a three and a half hour trip through the mountains. I set the cruise control on 62 mph, and by the time I was coasting down the mountains into Denver, my overhead read 19. 4 mpg. ! That's pretty cool, even if the computer's calcs are off by a gallon or two, it's an indication that these trucks -- especially when fully broken in -- are going to be as good or better than my '97 performed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top