Are the 2016 Ram HD’s Output Figures Bogus?

Cummins12V98 wrote:
If you want a ZIPPY Diesel for just driving around then get the Ford. If you want a truck to hook up to a nice load and do a great job getting you up AND down the mountain get the BIG "C".

I was comparing a diesel from 2005 to a 2015 because I owned both and both show the same horsepower under different standards. If I were to compare a 2015 6.7 PSD to the 2015 6.7 CTD, you may not like my opinion since engine performance was only one parameter when I selected my Ram over the Ford.

BTW: The Ford's exhaust brake in 2005 is still impressive today. The VGT's do a good job slowing the PSD or CTD powered trucks.

FishOnOne wrote:

BTW... Shiner I made a trip to the deer camp last weekend (I10) and made a solid 20 mpg.

Just got back from my trip to fill feeders at the deer lease. I hauled 26 50lb bags of corn and 16 50lb of protein (2,100 lbs total) down there. I had the cruise set 78 mph (speed limit is 75 mph) for about 95% of the way accept for the short period of time it is 70 mph on 410 where I was doing 73 mph and the stop signs to get to my house.

This is what I hauled down there 2,100 lbs.


My average speed is getting there is lower then my speed coming back because this includes having my truck running for 10 minutes doing 0 mph while I was getting the corn loaded up at the feed store along with idling at the drive through at Whataburger and a piss stop.


That is why I questioned how fast you were going with your average speed of 52 mph when you posted your 20 mpg reading. I had A LOT of idle time along with city driving through Pearsall being stopped at lights on this trip and still posted a 63 mph average speed.


This was my mileage coming back with 2,100 lbs less and only one piss stop and another drive through stop at Whataburger for the passengers. It is hard to read, but total miles is 145.1 with an average speed of 70 mph(which is far from your 52 mph average) at 17.5 mpg.




All these are just lie-o-meter stats though since I have not needed to fill up yet.

"The PSD was able to accelerate faster but the CTD holds the speed better on hills when both were loaded to the same GCW"

If you want a ZIPPY Diesel for just driving around then get the Ford. If you want a truck to hook up to a nice load and do a great job getting you up AND down the mountain get the BIG "C".

As far as I am concerned my 10K truck gets up and moves very well! Just does not "SOUND" like it!

As far as tearing things up take a look under a 13-15 RAM 3500 the components are massive. They are torque managed so they can't hurt themselves.

I just laugh at all the jacked up diesels with straight pipes doing stoplight racing around here. Don't think a used diesel will ever be in my future. They surely must be tearing up trannies, u-joints, and tires.

Double post.

Unless there is coversion chart between different standards, you cannot compare results between different standards. My 6.0 PSD and 6.7 CTD have the same horsepower rating but the CTD has more torque according to different standards. The PSD was able to accelerate faster but the CTD holds the speed better on hills when both were loaded to the same GCW. The point is to drive the ones that interest you and let your butt dyno tell you which one is better for your style of driving and terrain.

FishOnOne wrote:

I agree they definitely feel different and I would add a big part of that comes from 68 tranny hunting for gears and the dead pedal was absolutely horrendous to the point it almost felt dangerous when pulling out into traffic.

I haven't driven the '15 Fords but the reports I've read say they have a bit more turbo lag than the '11-'14 but the power feels stronger.

The 68RFE has been great so far. It shifts hard at times but it doesn't hunt at all, and it does a great job with a load in tow/haul mode in conjunction with the exhaust brake. It is an auto and I debated whether I wanted to go down to two pedals since I haven't had an auto as my daily driver since I was a teenager, but I've been real happy with it. You do give up a degree of control with an auto but that's the case with all of them.

I've experienced the dead pedal about twice and it isn't a very long lag, and it only happens in a very specific scenario where you get on the throttle, get off it and then get back on it hard in a very quick sequence. Avoid that and it's a non-issue, and it isn't a common scenario in normal driving.

The big reasons I went with the Ram over the Ford is I have a great deal more trust in the Cummins in terms of long term reliability, and the frame on the Ford is a wet noodle compared to the Ram or GM. It felt like a 20 year old truck with a modern drivetrain.

Tory Tory Troy try and read this slowly OK. The thread is about whether Rams engine numbers are Bogus. It was your Ford boy Levine that brought up the fact that Ford is not J2807 with all of their trucks Troy. This is so typical of you, when faced with facts all you can do is try and change the subject and claim that I need to control my "Angst". Pot meet Kettle LOL

Don

kennethwooster wrote:
We have plenty of HP and torque, so wish they would leave a good thing alone.

Exactly... at this point you are better off spending that money on penile enhancement surgery if you need to feel better about yourself, rather than $60K on a new truck so you can have 10 more lbs/ft of torque then the guy with the *other* brand truck.

Back in the farm equip. business, I watched this competition. Up Hp, and etc. but not put in larger engine and etc. As a result they hit the peak and things began to fall apart. Farmers became very upset and as a dealer it was a real pain. We have plenty of HP and torque, so wish they would leave a good thing alone.