2014 V6 1500 shootout

Kevin O. wrote:

parkersdad wrote:
Some of you are just arguing to argue. It does not take a diesel for a camper under 7000 lbs. over that you don't have to have one but why not buy the proper tool for the job. My trailer weighs close to 10,000 lbs and I tow in the mountains a lot. I had a gas 2500 and it did ok but it did not like the mountains. My diesel however runs up it at 1800 rpm's. Just my opinion.

Just for the record, my trailer is between 7500-8000lbs when loaded. My little V6 can climb 6-7% grades with the cruise set between 60-65mph at 2200rpms all day long. I also have a Tow rating over 11,000lbs. So i think i do have the proper tool for the job!:B

Kevin O, that's a nice looking rig, something to be proud of there.

Thanks!

Jeremiah

Turtle n Peeps wrote:

I don't know how many times this needs to be posted, but a high torque rating gives an effortless feeling to towing, until it abruptly runs out of power. Horsepower is what matters in high load situations, and the rpm it happens at determines how usable it is.
The Ram clearly shows that high torque, low hp does not perform well. Anyone who thinks those lousy accel numbers are not going to be aweful with a heavy / high drag trailer behind are confused.

Gesus, at least someone gets it.

We even have an alleged automotive engineers that don't know that HP gets you to the top of the hill the fastest. :R

I have a diesel that puts out an amazing 200HP and 425 ft/lbs of torque. Big woop, I'm at 30 MPH on big hills and small blocks or V6 with 300 HP are taking my door off of the hinges when they pass me. :B

Gets what? I have an early 2011 6.7 Cummins 650. It puts out the same 350 peak HP at 3000 RPM as the later 800 but who cares, I'll probably never use it. But the 45 extra HP the 800 puts out at 1600 RPM, now that I could use.

Turtle n Peeps wrote:

I don't know how many times this needs to be posted, but a high torque rating gives an effortless feeling to towing, until it abruptly runs out of power. Horsepower is what matters in high load situations, and the rpm it happens at determines how usable it is.
The Ram clearly shows that high torque, low hp does not perform well. Anyone who thinks those lousy accel numbers are not going to be aweful with a heavy / high drag trailer behind are confused.

Gesus, at least someone gets it.

We even have an alleged automotive engineers that don't know that HP gets you to the top of the hill the fastest. :R

I have a diesel that puts out an amazing 200HP and 425 ft/lbs of torque. Big woop, I'm at 30 MPH on big hills and small blocks or V6 with 300 HP are taking my door off of the hinges when they pass me. :B

And I bet you wave at them as they blow by you time and time again, because they are stopping for fuel all the time right TnP. :B

Don

I don't know how many times this needs to be posted, but a high torque rating gives an effortless feeling to towing, until it abruptly runs out of power. Horsepower is what matters in high load situations, and the rpm it happens at determines how usable it is.
The Ram clearly shows that high torque, low hp does not perform well. Anyone who thinks those lousy accel numbers are not going to be aweful with a heavy / high drag trailer behind are confused.

Gesus, at least someone gets it.

We even have an alleged automotive engineers that don't know that HP gets you to the top of the hill the fastest. :R

I have a diesel that puts out an amazing 200HP and 425 ft/lbs of torque. Big woop, I'm at 30 MPH on big hills and small blocks or V6 with 300 HP are taking my door off of the hinges when they pass me. :B

parkersdad wrote:
Some of you are just arguing to argue. It does not take a diesel for a camper under 7000 lbs. over that you don't have to have one but why not buy the proper tool for the job. My trailer weighs close to 10,000 lbs and I tow in the mountains a lot. I had a gas 2500 and it did ok but it did not like the mountains. My diesel however runs up it at 1800 rpm's. Just my opinion.

Just for the record, my trailer is between 7500-8000lbs when loaded. My little V6 can climb 6-7% grades with the cruise set between 60-65mph at 2200rpms all day long. I also have a Tow rating over 11,000lbs. So i think i do have the proper tool for the job!:B

parkersdad wrote:

TrevorL wrote:
what's laughable is the fact my 3.7 out runs the 4.6 and 5.3's..... Both my friends had to accept it after they got their butts handed to them.. I'm all for American v8's .. I have a turbo foxbody mustang with and LSX swap... But the new smaller displacement motors make more power than the v8's of not to long ago.. I don't see why it's laughable at all..

parkersdad wrote:
Talking about a V-6 truck is laughable anyway.

Because we are on a towing forum. Tow vehicles don't have a V6 in them.

Some folks need to get with the times, and work on their knowledge regarding power, work, force, and capability.

parkersdad wrote:

Fordlover wrote:


Really? What makes a Tow vehicle a tow vehicle? a V8, a V10? A hitch? A bed? Please do enlighten us.

A diesel!!!

Kind of like this former 4 cyl Kia of mine, towing 2500-3000 lbs from time to time.



Or this pro set up Taurus from Can-Am



... so... much... more... to towing than some arbitrary number or type of fuel or number of cylinders.

Thanks!

Jeremiah

Bionic Man wrote:

TrevorL wrote:
yep.. specs on my 3.7



Type

6-cylinder, Dual Overhead Cam, 24-valve with Ti-VCT



Displacement

3.7L (214 CID)

Horsepower (SAE net)

302 @ 6500 rpm

Torque

276 lb.-ft. @ 4000 rpm

srt20 wrote:
I wonder how people in the 80s towed their heavy rvs with 180hp 454.....

Today's v-6 have what, about 275-300 hp??

What did the old 454 have in way of torque? 450 ish ft/pounds?

Somewhere near what the slowest truck in this test had lol.

parkersdad wrote:

TrevorL wrote:
what's laughable is the fact my 3.7 out runs the 4.6 and 5.3's..... Both my friends had to accept it after they got their butts handed to them.. I'm all for American v8's .. I have a turbo foxbody mustang with and LSX swap... But the new smaller displacement motors make more power than the v8's of not to long ago.. I don't see why it's laughable at all..

parkersdad wrote:
Talking about a V-6 truck is laughable anyway.

Because we are on a towing forum. Tow vehicles don't have a V6 in them.

Some folks need to get with the times, and work on their knowledge regarding power, work, force, and capability.

parkersdad wrote:

Fordlover wrote:


Really? What makes a Tow vehicle a tow vehicle? a V8, a V10? A hitch? A bed? Please do enlighten us.

A diesel!!!

AHA. Like the slowest truck in the test with class trailing payload?
Riiiiiight.

I don't know how many times this needs to be posted, but a high torque rating gives an effortless feeling to towing, until it abruptly runs out of power. Horsepower is what matters in high load situations, and the rpm it happens at determines how usable it is.
The Ram clearly shows that high torque, low hp does not perform well. Anyone who thinks those lousy accel numbers are not going to be aweful with a heavy / high drag trailer behind are confused.

Turtle n Peeps wrote:
What did I see that stood out from this whole article?

Well lets see. I can almost buy TWO Toyota Tacoma's for the price of the Ecodiesel. That is wacked right there!

I can't carry 3 of my buddies on a trip with me in the tested Ecodiesel because I would be over payload for the Ecodiesel. What the $&*()???????
Sorry Rick, you can't come along. Sam and Rob already signed up to go and we would be over payload if you came along. That is wacked right there!

$57,000 for a half ton pickup that can't even carry 3 of my buddies on a trip? That is wacked right there!


Or I can buy the Tacoma instead of the Ecodiesel and drive it 150,000 miles for free!! Is that right? Seriously; someone check my estimate rough math on that! :E (I figured $3.75 a gallon for gas)

If those figures are correct, that is wacked right there! :(

I agree with everything except, after owning 2 brand new Tacoma's I have to say, they are a $hitty penalty box, especially compared to the gold plated Ram.

colliehauler wrote:
Without the Ford 3.7 or the Ram 3.6 it's not much of a test.

Very true. Those 2 would have been on the cheaper end, and the best performers.
And having owned 3 of the trucks in that test, I can say the Ford and Ram V6 would have been #2 & #3 in efficiency, right behind the slowest truck of the group, while at the same time, being the quickest, cept maybe the Tacoma.