Here's the Ram pulling 30k lbs up the Ike Gauntlet.Enjoy...Link

If it was able to hold 20k+ lbs with its exhaust brake going down a grade seven, then I wonder what happened to the Ram in the comparison GM did a few years back where they showed that it could not even slow down half that amount of weight. I guess I was right in the fact that they were purposely not using it correctly to make it look worse than theirs. Not too bad of a time. I personally would not want to tow anything that heavy, but nice to know it will get it up the mountain if one needed it to. I kind of don't want Cummins to continue this perpetual e-peen competition of more power with Ford as was stated in the video, and would rather see the big three start focusing on better fuel mileage from these rigs along with reliability. Reliability/dependability and fuel economy were higher on my lists of wants over more power (since all three had more than enough to easily move what I tow) which is why I chose what I did.

I almost wonder, if all 3 stopped going for more power and did some sort of "Gentlemen's agreement" on power and torque figures (like the Japanese used to do with supposedly 280 horsepower cars) if they could optimize the emissions systems so we could maybe get rid of a few parts, like EGR and more passive regenerations for the DPF? Thereby increasing fuel economy as well.

The solution is the flexfuel Ford V10 Ecoboost 600HP!/Lotsa torques at 1800rpm...

I wish they'd stop changing how they test the trucks. Let the truck do the work so that each test is an apples to apples comparison. Every time they change an independent variable the tests become subjective to human manipulation.

ShinerBock wrote:If it was able to hold 20k+ lbs with its exhaust brake going down a grade seven, then I wonder what happened to the Ram in the comparison GM did a few years back where they showed that it could not even slow down half that amount of weight. I guess I was right in the fact that they were purposely not using it correctly to make it look worse than theirs. Not too bad of a time. I personally would not want to tow anything that heavy, but nice to know it will get it up the mountain if one needed it to. I kind of don't want Cummins to continue this perpetual e-peen competition of more power with Ford as was stated in the video, and would rather see the big three start focusing on better fuel mileage from these rigs along with reliability. Reliability/dependability and fuel economy were higher on my lists of wants over more power (since all three had more than enough to easily move what I tow) which is why I chose what I did.I believe the difference in the exhaust brake performance is Mr. Truck manually down shifted the truck whereas in the past test they let the truck decide when to shift.I agree with Patriotgrunt that they should be consistent with the test methodology.

2016 RAM Super Ike Gauntlet | Good Sam Community

rhagfo
Explorer III
Sep 01, 2016
Cummins12V98 wrote:
spoon059 wrote:
Cummins12V98 wrote:
We humans can SEE what's in front of us.

Let me correct that for you... We humans have the ABILITY to see what's in front of us. Observing other drivers on the road, it is quite apparent that they don't see what is in front of them until they are on top of it... You know those guys, the ones cruising along in the left lane where there are signs for miles alerting to the left lane being closed. They are the morons that drive in the left lane, clip at least one traffic barrel before they realize that the lane is ending, then they usually cut into lane 2 and slam on their brakes, causing a chain reaction behind them... all because they didn't chose to exercise their ABILITY to see what is in front of them...

I REALLY miss my air horn for those exact reasons! A little blast will wake their AZZ up. :B

Only a about $100 separating you and a very nice set of Kline Air Horns. You already have air on the 2015.
The horns on my 2001 sounded like they belonged on a Kia! Now when needed I have a fitting voice.
FishOnOne
Nomad
Sep 01, 2016
Geeze wrote:
FishOnOne wrote:
Here's the Ram pulling 30k lbs up the Ike Gauntlet.

Enjoy...

Link

I like the Mr.Truck Gauntlet videos just to see how the transmissions perform vs engine RPM's. The Chevy HD2500 6.0 gas beat the Ram 6.4 by over a minute and they made a big deal out of it. I don't know anyone who would buy one over the other because of this small difference. Both are fine trucks as is the Ford Super Duty 6.2.

The way I look at these tests is the one that pulls the load up the Gauntlet in the least time is the one that will pull a load the easiest with less drama.
Geeze
Explorer
Sep 01, 2016
FishOnOne wrote:
Here's the Ram pulling 30k lbs up the Ike Gauntlet.

Enjoy...

Link

I like the Mr.Truck Gauntlet videos just to see how the transmissions perform vs engine RPM's. The Chevy HD2500 6.0 gas beat the Ram 6.4 by over a minute and they made a big deal out of it. I don't know anyone who would buy one over the other because of this small difference. Both are fine trucks as is the Ford Super Duty 6.2.
Cummins12V98
Explorer III
Aug 30, 2016
spoon059 wrote:
Cummins12V98 wrote:
We humans can SEE what's in front of us.

Let me correct that for you... We humans have the ABILITY to see what's in front of us. Observing other drivers on the road, it is quite apparent that they don't see what is in front of them until they are on top of it... You know those guys, the ones cruising along in the left lane where there are signs for miles alerting to the left lane being closed. They are the morons that drive in the left lane, clip at least one traffic barrel before they realize that the lane is ending, then they usually cut into lane 2 and slam on their brakes, causing a chain reaction behind them... all because they didn't chose to exercise their ABILITY to see what is in front of them...

I REALLY miss my air horn for those exact reasons! A little blast will wake their AZZ up. :B
ShinerBock
Explorer
Aug 29, 2016
transamz9 wrote:

Actually no brakes are needed. It just has to sense your foot on the pedal. Basically turn your brake lights on.

That is considered a brake tap within the perimeters of the "test" and would be a score against Ram. So no, full mode would not be the ideal mode to be in for the parameters of this "test" to get the best score. I am not sure why you keep debating this?

transamz9 wrote:
This is the problem, people want everything to be "Automatic" and it's just not possible if one wants to get 100% efficiency out of something. I think the test that these people do should be done by someone that knows how to get the most out of a particular truck. That would show the consumers what the truck can actually do.

I agree that the test is stupid and is purely just for e-peen comparisons between fanboys to say their favorite does something better. Real truck owners who would be towing that much weight would not completely rely on the truck to do it all. I am just saying that if one wants to compare apples to apples in a test where you are trying to avoid brake taps and letting the truck to it all then Auto mode is the mode to be in.
transamz9
Explorer
Aug 29, 2016
ShinerBock wrote:
transamz9 wrote:

The EB in full mode will work just as hard as auto mode you just have to touch the brake pedal to tell the truck to downshift. You don't have to manually shift it.

True, but in a test where you are scored on brake taps and you want the truck to do it all, full mode is not the mode you want to be in.

Actually no brakes are needed. It just has to sense your foot on the pedal. Basically turn your brake lights on.

This is the problem, people want everything to be "Automatic" and it's just not possible if one wants to get 100% efficiency out of something. I think the test that these people do should be done by someone that knows how to get the most out of a particular truck. That would show the consumers what the truck can actually do.
Bedlam
Moderator
Aug 29, 2016
We rely on you lighting them up and educating them since they don't get the message any other way.
spoon059
Explorer II
Aug 29, 2016
Cummins12V98 wrote:
We humans can SEE what's in front of us.

Let me correct that for you... We humans have the ABILITY to see what's in front of us. Observing other drivers on the road, it is quite apparent that they don't see what is in front of them until they are on top of it... You know those guys, the ones cruising along in the left lane where there are signs for miles alerting to the left lane being closed. They are the morons that drive in the left lane, clip at least one traffic barrel before they realize that the lane is ending, then they usually cut into lane 2 and slam on their brakes, causing a chain reaction behind them... all because they didn't chose to exercise their ABILITY to see what is in front of them...
Bionic_Man
Explorer
Aug 29, 2016
What happened to the standardized MPG test that they were doing (level ground, 65 MPH...)? I remember seeing one on a RAM 2500, and the mid size GM, but nothing sense.
Grit_dog
Navigator
Aug 29, 2016
Cummins12V98 wrote:
When descending Ashland pass coming into Oregon on I-5 for example with full EB and TH on I set cruise to 55 and lock out 3rd gear with 33K combined weight and it holds down the pass no problem. I am running in the high 2K rpm range. If I choose 4th it will hold most of the way but will creep up and need to touch the brakes lightly and hit resume on cruise.

EXPERIMENT is all I can say. We humans can SEE what's in front of us.

And also personal preference. In the situation you describe, I wouldn't reef on the engine at near max rpm just to save a tap or 2 on the brakes.
The capability of the new pickups gets more impressive every year, but now it's a contest to see who can get to the bottom without ever using the service brakes?
I'm more inclined to pick an option that is in the moderate range of all systems, rather than maxing out one and not using the other.
Now if you have to ride the brakes down in 4th, then by all means, use all the engine braking rpms you can in a lower gear to save your brakes.