Thinking about a Ram 2500 diesel...

[Newsa]

I test drove a Nissan Titan XD 2X2 today, it is nice and comfortable and the engine is very responsive and shifted perfect. I just might own it by the end of the week.

I hear it doesn't have an exhaust brake?

 

[RVTRKN]

Fleet manager said it did, BUT I didn't hear it or see any controls for it, but the version I drove is a little complicated. Kinda of like a Laramie, I'll know more Saturday if truck is still on the lot.

 

[KenHwy61]

No exhaust brake is correct. Most I've seen are listing over 50K so it will be interesting to see how they sell when a HD truck is similarly priced.

 

[Minnow101]

I understand the payload on the Nissan is pretty low due to the weight of the Cummins. If payload is important you may want to look at.

 

[RVTRKN]

A little more than an Ecodiesel but at 310HP/555TQ it out tows in GCWR and GWR. The frame is a stout frame, unlike the Tundra. It starts in the low 40's. The one I'm looking is 48K

 

[Newsa]

Fleet manager said it did, BUT I didn't hear it or see any controls for it, but the version I drove is a little complicated. Kinda of like a Laramie, I'll know more Saturday if truck is still on the lot.

It has a setting where engine drag combined with conventional brakes will automatically control downhill speed. But no exhaust brake. Engine drag in a diesel isn't much without an exhaust brake. Fleet manager must have misunderstood specifically what you were asking about. It's sutomatic speed control is similar to the automatic exhaust brake setting on a Cummins equipped Ram. But it simulates an exhaust brake.
Doesn't actually have one

 

[RVTRKN]

I've been doing some math, and used a loan calculator from another close by dealer. They offered a 4x4 SV with a slight package upgrade for 35K after discounts, let the fun begin. It would be nice to show up at May Madness with it, I wonder if I'll get kicked out of town.

 

[Bruce Beard]

The Nissan is interesting but...leaf springs, no exhaust brake, an interior that looks like it was copied from a 7 year old F-150 and...well..."Nissan"...
That's enough for me to say no thanks!

In all honesty, it is not a bad looking truck and I'm sure that engine will be sweet! I simply don't want one myself.

 

[spoon059]

The down side to a 2500/CTD is the meager 3:42 rear diff and the inferior rfe68 auto.

The 3.42 rear diff isn't meager, it is more than adequate for up to 17K lbs towing, or else the engineers wouldn't have put it in there. Besides the fact that the OP is looking to tow WAY less than 17K.
What makes the 68RFE inferior? It handles 17K with no problems and tows and shifts just fine. It takes a little while to get used to, but Ram designed the transmission to be worked, not to be a grocery getter. There are plenty of people with hundreds of thousands of miles on stock 68RFE transmissions. It is far from inferior.

OP, the 2500 is ore truck than you need, which means that the payload is more than you need, the brakes are more than you need, the power is more than you need. I think you will find the towing experience to be much better when you have "more than you need" as opposed to "not enough" like you currently have. Towing an 8500 brick camper I can get almost 12 mpg at 68 mph. I think that is incredible. Towing a more aerodynamic Airstream will likely get you even better. On the highway not towing I can see 22 mpg at 75 mph. I think that is incredible too. The Ram 2500 is a darn fine truck for you and will work great. Like I said before though, Ram wants this truck to be worked. Your headlights are aimed for a full payload, your transmission is tuned to be hauling weight, your TPMS is designed to haul a full payload. Everything about this truck likes work. The more you work it (within spec), the better it will feel.

 

[spoon059]

I test drove a Nissan Titan XD 2X2 today, it is nice and comfortable and the engine is very responsive and shifted perfect. I just might own it by the end of the week.

Enjoy your new truck, lets see how it handles your 10K lbs curb weight with an 8800 lbs GVWR...

 

[Newsa]

I've been doing some math, and used a loan calculator from another close by dealer. They offered a 4x4 SV with a slight package upgrade for 35K after discounts, let the fun begin. It would be nice to show up at May Madness with it, I wonder if I'll get kicked out of town.

I thought May Madness was about CTD, not necessarily Ram. But sounds like some Chrysler guys showing up might hide you in the back.

 

[RVTRKN]

Enjoy your new truck, lets see how it handles your 10K lbs curb weight with an 8800 lbs GVWR...

I'm not replacing my work truck, the wife will drive it, and it will tow the boat. The 68rfe was originally equipped with 3:73---4/10. So what changed, some bean counter counting MPG under test conditions. Empty trucks, flat roads, at 10K it sucks diesel in traffic.

 

[kthaxton]

The 68rfe was originally equipped with 3:73---4/10. So what changed,

Increased engine torque, beefier rear axles.

The transmission does not dictate what gear ratio should be used.

....and.....why would a "bean counter" be concerned with the consumer's mileage? They count the beans for the company, not the customer.

 

[RVTRKN]

CAFE standards

 

[kthaxton]

but what does that have to do with the bean counters?

It as become cliché to blame the bean counters for everything, but this one makes no sense.

It's really quite logical. Obviously, an auto manufacturer wants to produce as fuel efficient of a vehicle as they can, and of course CAFE standards ensure that, but customers want it too. If Ram designed and implemented changes to their products (increased torque etc) to work perfectly fine (great in fact), while offering slightly increased mileage, why not?.....and NO vehicle used for towing will ever do it's job without occasionally having to shift down, whether on its own or by the driver's choice (still not sure why this is such an issue ).

So far, I've pulled about 10k with mine, and I think it is fantastic. Not sure what your issue is.

 

[RVTRKN]

We'll flip the other side of the coin, if I was a Ford fan, and my 2014 was the first CTD I owned as equipped, and got **** poor MPG, it would be my last. Now I just described the owner of my 2014. Not to mention the rear diff scrambled at 15K miles. Which BTW, He lost 10 working days of Capitol use, and I had to use my 3500 to replace it with. He's now gone to the Ford transit with the Powerstroke, because mine has performed so poorly in the MPG. I relate it to the 3:42 due to traffic, after all it is an HVAC vehicle.

 

[kthaxton]

What kind of mileage were you getting?

 

[RVTRKN]

Still getting 13MPG last I heard, it should be much better. When on the FWY, the lie O meter says 19. In city it drops to 12/13. The next tech is stuck with the transit

 

[kthaxton]

That seems typical for stop and go traffic, but I'm just guessing, I never do just city driving.
Do you KNOW of people getting noticeably better than this with ANY modern Diesel truck in city driving?
Is there anybody here with 3.73's or 4.10's that gets better mileage than this in traffic?
What does his Powerstroke get?
What makes you think it "should" be much better?

 

[Newsa]

Increased engine torque, beefier rear axles.

Which year did they beef up the rear axles?