Dodge 6.4 hemisphere vs Chevy 6.0

Dadoffourgirls wrote:

IndyCamp wrote:
...

Businesses have to continue to innovate or they get left behind and eventually die off. With a company as big as GM, it won't happen tomorrow, but they aren't immune. You would think they would have learned something about the importance of innovation from Toyota and Honda in the 80's and 90's.

Well as long as the US Goverment has the taxpayer checkbook open and the ability to declare bankruptcy at will, GM can continue on as they have been for the last several decades and not have to worry. And this comment is coming from a guy that owns a GM truck.

spoon059 wrote:

MFL wrote:
I think either would work for you. I would only wonder why someone would trade the Dodge, at a Chevy dealership, with only 10,000 miles on it.

Jerry

I got my 2015 Ram from a Ford dealer with 10K miles. God bless poor decisions by others!!!

Some would say smart decision to get rid of the POS Ram.

At work we have 3500 6.0's and F-350 6.2' Fords, I had a 12' 2500, Ram with a 5.7 ( I have no experience with the 6.4). Loaded equally, out of the three my Ram seemed to have better seat of the pants power followed by the 6.2 with the 6.0 just feeling sluggish with a very high rpm band comparatively, the 6.0 spends much of its time in that 3500 to 4000 rpm range, not a big deal the engine is certainly stout and reliable but just continually feels labored.
The other thing is, I was very interested in GM when I bought my Ram and was actually test driving them with the intention of buying one over the Ram, like I said I really do like them and the 6.0's excellent track record. The problem for me was how proud GM is of their products, they were priced considerably higher than an equally equipped Ram for what I considered to be a less refined truck and drivetrain. As for Ford, well it's a Ford, no thanks...:B. Just having a little fun there, even though I think the Ford HD's look like they were designed by a 5 year old with a crayon, they have a very stout powertrain and man, their F-150's are good looking.

IndyCamp wrote:
...I am one who was upgrading to a 2500 and traded in a 2013 1500 Silverado for a 6.4 RAM, and one of the major reasons was the fact that GM is still using the 6.0. I just think GM is being left behind in that market.

Now, I may be a rare case, but only offering the 6.0 did cost GM a sale in my case. I would have stuck with Chevy if they offered the 6.2 in a 2500.

You know, once upon a time, the horse and buggy had a "proven track record" and still sold "well enough to be a competitive product."

Businesses have to continue to innovate or they get left behind and eventually die off. With a company as big as GM, it won't happen tomorrow, but they aren't immune. You would think they would have learned something about the importance of innovation from Toyota and Honda in the 80's and 90's.

So what specifically in the 6.4 made you want that engine? What are the results of that?

I get 18 mpg in my Express, was getting 17 in my HD with the 6.0. It has the power where I need it. The ability to run in V4 mode might be my only wish. I know that my 1500 spends lots of time there.

spoon059 wrote:

I disagree with you here...how is it "neglecting" the 6.0 simply because they haven't given it a massive overhaul? The 6.0 is a solid performing engine with a proven track record. It gets respectable gas mileage and makes respectable power numbers. It still sells well enough to be a competitive product. That isn't neglecting it... that is making an intelligent decision not to spend money on R&D to fix something that isn't broken...

I am one who was upgrading to a 2500 and traded in a 2013 1500 Silverado for a 6.4 RAM, and one of the major reasons was the fact that GM is still using the 6.0. I just think GM is being left behind in that market.

Now, I may be a rare case, but only offering the 6.0 did cost GM a sale in my case. I would have stuck with Chevy if they offered the 6.2 in a 2500.

You know, once upon a time, the horse and buggy had a "proven track record" and still sold "well enough to be a competitive product."

Businesses have to continue to innovate or they get left behind and eventually die off. With a company as big as GM, it won't happen tomorrow, but they aren't immune. You would think they would have learned something about the importance of innovation from Toyota and Honda in the 80's and 90's.

kmbelt wrote:
I take as much value in Consumer Reports vehicle reviews as i do TFL reviews.

Yea... but CR doesn't test the vehicles to see which one is fastest to the top of a mountain pass that I will NEVER drive on. And after all, isn't RVing all about RACING to our destination? ;)

kmbelt wrote:

ktmrfs wrote:

Greene728 wrote:

dreeder wrote:
Im not trying to be offensive and I would consider myself a Ram guy but I take very, very, little stock in Consumer Reports. Certainly not enough that their accolades for something would sway my purchase decision the least bit.

Absolutely!

Mine also. I guess to often there definition of "good" or "excellent" don't match mine at all. Nor is there much match between my experience with various products quality and performance vs. Consumer reports results.

It isn't just cars either.

I guess, even though they say no advertizing, the result is that if they didn't have a evaluation system (even if it makes no sense for practical use) to come up with ratings from excellent to trash even if they are all pretty compareable, why would anyone buy the magazine.

I take as much value in Consumer Reports vehicle reviews as i do TFL reviews.

BAZINGA!

ktmrfs wrote:

Greene728 wrote:

dreeder wrote:
Im not trying to be offensive and I would consider myself a Ram guy but I take very, very, little stock in Consumer Reports. Certainly not enough that their accolades for something would sway my purchase decision the least bit.

Absolutely!

Mine also. I guess to often there definition of "good" or "excellent" don't match mine at all. Nor is there much match between my experience with various products quality and performance vs. Consumer reports results.

It isn't just cars either.

I guess, even though they say no advertizing, the result is that if they didn't have a evaluation system (even if it makes no sense for practical use) to come up with ratings from excellent to trash even if they are all pretty compareable, why would anyone buy the magazine.

I take as much value in Consumer Reports vehicle reviews as i do TFL reviews.

Greene728 wrote:

dreeder wrote:
Im not trying to be offensive and I would consider myself a Ram guy but I take very, very, little stock in Consumer Reports. Certainly not enough that their accolades for something would sway my purchase decision the least bit.

Absolutely!

Mine also. I guess to often there definition of "good" or "excellent" don't match mine at all. Nor is there much match between my experience with various products quality and performance vs. Consumer reports results.

It isn't just cars either.

I guess, even though they say no advertizing, the result is that if they didn't have a evaluation system (even if it makes no sense for practical use) to come up with ratings from excellent to trash even if they are all pretty compareable, why would anyone buy the magazine.

dreeder wrote:
Im not trying to be offensive and I would consider myself a Ram guy but I take very, very, little stock in Consumer Reports. Certainly not enough that their accolades for something would sway my purchase decision the least bit.

Absolutely!