Might be buying a Dually....

emcvay wrote:
. . . Not sure about the 4.10's as I think the mileage will suffer but it would pull a house I suppose, not that I'd need that any time soon but who knows.

Don't really understand all the concern about fuel economy when trying to decide between, say, a 3.73 or 4.10 rear end. I can drop our Ram Cummins from 6th to 5th (empty or loaded with 12-14k) and get the exactly the same fuel economy. Dropping from 3.73 to 4.10 is only a fraction of the overall gearing change that occurs vs. dropping from 6th to 5th. The only exception I've found with our Cummins is when driving empty at very high speeds, say 80 mph. I may gain .5 mpg running in 6th vs. 5th. However, when under load, no difference.

If given the option, I'd always pick the lowest (highest numerical) rear-end ratio available. The mechanical advantages of the lower rear-end ratio (less drivetrain stress---much higher tow capacity) far, far outweigh any concerns about fuel economy IMO.