Another 1/2-Ton Bites the Dust :)
We finally decided a good payload margin was more important than the smoother ride (of the Ram 2500), so . . . we pulled the trigger on a new 2016 Ram 3500 Cummins CC SB 4x4 . . . having trouble getting this smile off our faces! Yes, the Tundra 5.7 we traded-in accelerated quicker. However, I'm finding the Cummin's methodical, low drama approach to acceleration addictive, and strangely relaxing :)
Ended up purchasing this truck in CA (we live in AZ). Very tough to find Tradesman Ram 3500's (with the Chrome and Popular Equipment packages) that also have the trailer brake controller, rear camera, and 5th wheel/gooseneck options. My research showed about 3 of 'em west of the Mississippi (in white or silver). There are literally hundreds of 'em configured like this without the 5th wheel/gooseneck option. Don't understand why--especially on a high payload truck like the Ram 3500. For us, the 5th wheel/gooseneck option was a no-brainer for $400. It includes a 2nd 7 pin connector in the bed (in additon to the 7-pin connector on the bumper). I like the fact it keeps the bed flat when a hitch is not in use. Plus, being OEM, it's designed as an intregal part of the frame--IMO much more seamless than the aftermarket solutions I've seen.
Anywhoser, it was a 430+ mile (all freeway/interstate) drive from the dealership, home. Dealer topped off the tank before we left. Stayed with the flow of traffic in CA (75 MPH) and in AZ (80 MPH). The route included about 50 miles of CA rush hour traffic along with a number of 4000 ft. passes. Reset the EVIC before we departed. EVIC showed an 18.5 MPG average at the end of the trip. Hand calculated at 17.5 MPG. Only got 16 MPG in the Tundra 5.7 driving the same route/speed earlier in the day.
Thanks to Greene728 for his suggestion to lower the air pressure on the 3500 to soften the ride. Lowered the front to 70 and the rear to 60 after our trip back. Noticeable difference in the ride. FWIW, noticed there was very little road contact on the outside edges of the tires with the tires at 80 lbs. (tire "nubs" still visible). It's possible the lower pressure may actually improve tire wear when empty.
Want to thank everybody for their help deciding whether we should go with the Ram 2500 or 3500. For our immediate plans the Ram 2500's payload would have probably sufficed. However, went with the 3500 since there's very little difference in price. We wanted to error on the side of caution in terms of payload . . . one never knows what you may want to pull in the future. It's mind-boggling this 3500 has almost *triple* the payload of the Tundra!
Tried to post some pics, but the Photobucket links won't work :(
Ended up purchasing this truck in CA (we live in AZ). Very tough to find Tradesman Ram 3500's (with the Chrome and Popular Equipment packages) that also have the trailer brake controller, rear camera, and 5th wheel/gooseneck options. My research showed about 3 of 'em west of the Mississippi (in white or silver). There are literally hundreds of 'em configured like this without the 5th wheel/gooseneck option. Don't understand why--especially on a high payload truck like the Ram 3500. For us, the 5th wheel/gooseneck option was a no-brainer for $400. It includes a 2nd 7 pin connector in the bed (in additon to the 7-pin connector on the bumper). I like the fact it keeps the bed flat when a hitch is not in use. Plus, being OEM, it's designed as an intregal part of the frame--IMO much more seamless than the aftermarket solutions I've seen.
Anywhoser, it was a 430+ mile (all freeway/interstate) drive from the dealership, home. Dealer topped off the tank before we left. Stayed with the flow of traffic in CA (75 MPH) and in AZ (80 MPH). The route included about 50 miles of CA rush hour traffic along with a number of 4000 ft. passes. Reset the EVIC before we departed. EVIC showed an 18.5 MPG average at the end of the trip. Hand calculated at 17.5 MPG. Only got 16 MPG in the Tundra 5.7 driving the same route/speed earlier in the day.
Thanks to Greene728 for his suggestion to lower the air pressure on the 3500 to soften the ride. Lowered the front to 70 and the rear to 60 after our trip back. Noticeable difference in the ride. FWIW, noticed there was very little road contact on the outside edges of the tires with the tires at 80 lbs. (tire "nubs" still visible). It's possible the lower pressure may actually improve tire wear when empty.
Want to thank everybody for their help deciding whether we should go with the Ram 2500 or 3500. For our immediate plans the Ram 2500's payload would have probably sufficed. However, went with the 3500 since there's very little difference in price. We wanted to error on the side of caution in terms of payload . . . one never knows what you may want to pull in the future. It's mind-boggling this 3500 has almost *triple* the payload of the Tundra!
Tried to post some pics, but the Photobucket links won't work :(
