The articleThe resident RAM and EcoDiesel haters might not want to read this.

Neither will the Chevy fans :)I read it. - They beat up on Chevy pretty bad- All trucks were equally priced when similarly equipped (even with the premium pd for the diesel)- They thought the 2.7L EcoBoost had plenty of power- They liked the Ram w/EcoDiesel best

I get a kick out of the tests. If a guy drives a brand a test favors it is everything but when it is favoring a brand they don't have it doesn't mean anything. Interesting reads but things change. Good for the consumers maybe if they are buying.chevman

Thanks for the link - that's an interesting read. My reactions as I read through it:- The fuel economy between the Ford and Ram seems to be a wash. At current prices in my area ($3/gas, $3.70/diesel) and the observed 19 mpg versus 23 mpg - over 10,000 miles, the fuel cost works out to $1579 for the Ford and $1608 for the Ram. Gas prices will probably rise again as we move into next summer so the Ram may have the slight edge at that point, but the difference is really minor.- I'm surprised at how fast the 2.7 is. I'm also surprised at how light it is - 4900 lbs isn't much heavier than my wife's Pilot.- Holy payload, Ram. 960 lbs? Yes, that's a minivan laughing at you. - Ditto on tow rating, Ford. 5,000?- The Chevy seems way behind and it's a pretty new design. That has to be alarming to GM.

When comparing the weight and MPG, remember that the Ford was not a crew cab.I liked this statemetn.Despite what truck advertising would have you think, customer research is consistent across the board: Most light-duty trucks drive around empty most of the time. Think about it: Of all the trucks you saw on the road today, how many were hauling something besides air? With that in mind, we started with a drive around town and down the freeway with empty trucks. The differences between the three trucks were stark.Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/trucks/1501_comparison_2015_ford_f_150_vs_ram_1500_chevrolet_silverado/#ixzz3KBwC9IRR

Bionic Man wrote:The articleThe resident RAM and EcoDiesel haters might not want to read this.Interesting read. In a world of bigger, badder 1500 series pick ups, Ram seems to be going in the opposite direction with their EcoDiesel. I'm assuming they must think there is a market for a PU that doesn't need to tow the space shuttle or break the sound barrier in between stop signs?

MotorTrend Tests the 1500's | Good Sam Community

TurnThePage
Explorer
Nov 30, 2014
Food for thought.
Quoted from the article: In the end, we drove 1,041 odometer miles and used 27.537 gallons, with the display reading 38.1 mpg.
NinerBikes
Explorer
Nov 30, 2014
boocoodinkydow wrote:
Longest range I've experienced was 665 when the warning light came on. Could have most likely pushed it to 700 but no need to push my luck. And yes, mich, I dare say 400 would be a good guess towing a moderate load.

How fast were you driving on that tank and how much city traffic or stop and go did it consist of?
boocoodinkydow
Explorer
Nov 30, 2014
Longest range I've experienced was 665 when the warning light came on. Could have most likely pushed it to 700 but no need to push my luck. And yes, mich, I dare say 400 would be a good guess towing a moderate load.
tragusa3
Explorer
Nov 30, 2014
I've got a 36g tank of mine. Range of about 420 miles with my trailer...700+ with in good conditions.
mich800
Explorer
Nov 30, 2014
rjstractor wrote:
buddylam wrote:
That is a great test but you and Ford are missing the most important part of that test.
The Ram loses 45 seconds to the Ford up that hill out of a 700 mile range. What is the Fords range pulling that trailer. I am willing to bet that the Ford will make many more fuel stops over 700 miles while pulling that trailer..

I keep seeing reference to a "700 mile range". I'm not a math major, but with 26 gallons of fuel, to go 700 miles you have to get almost 27 mpg, and that leaves nothing in reserve. Towing a travel trailer will reduce that mileage considerably. I would think that a 400 mile range towing a trailer would be much more realistic.

I was wondering the same thing.
NinerBikes
Explorer
Nov 30, 2014
rjstractor wrote:
buddylam wrote:
That is a great test but you and Ford are missing the most important part of that test.
The Ram loses 45 seconds to the Ford up that hill out of a 700 mile range. What is the Fords range pulling that trailer. I am willing to bet that the Ford will make many more fuel stops over 700 miles while pulling that trailer..

I keep seeing reference to a "700 mile range". I'm not a math major, but with 26 gallons of fuel, to go 700 miles you have to get almost 27 mpg, and that leaves nothing in reserve. Towing a travel trailer will reduce that mileage considerably. I would think that a 400 mile range towing a trailer would be much more realistic.

I know for a fact that towing my 21 foot 4000 # Travel trailer with my 26.5 gallon tank on my AWD 2013 Touareg TDI with a 3.0 turbodiesel, 450 miles has been done on a tank. I get 16.5 to 19.5 mpg every time, trailering from L.A. to St George, about 420 miles for me there, then to Parowan UT to sleep the first night. Fill up again in SLC next mid day the 2nd day, and I am in W. Yellowstone the 2nd night. Pee breaks are when they are.

I believe the Ram 1500 Ecodiesel will do almost the same, if trailering at speeds of 55 to 58 MPH, which I am limited to due to 14" tires on my TT. Much over 60, the fuel suck gets ridiculous when trailering a wind sail behind you.

When I am not trailering, and on interstate, polished concrete, doing 65 to 75 MPH, I see 32 to 34 MPG, yet the Touareg is only rated 28 MPG on highway by the EPA. The Touareg is fairly aerodynamic for the SUV that it is.

Fuelly MPG Link for 2013 Touareg fuel consumption
rjstractor
Nomad
Nov 30, 2014
buddylam wrote:
That is a great test but you and Ford are missing the most important part of that test.
The Ram loses 45 seconds to the Ford up that hill out of a 700 mile range. What is the Fords range pulling that trailer. I am willing to bet that the Ford will make many more fuel stops over 700 miles while pulling that trailer..

I keep seeing reference to a "700 mile range". I'm not a math major, but with 26 gallons of fuel, to go 700 miles you have to get almost 27 mpg, and that leaves nothing in reserve. Towing a travel trailer will reduce that mileage considerably. I would think that a 400 mile range towing a trailer would be much more realistic.
Fast_Mopar
Explorer
Nov 30, 2014
Hybridhunter wrote:
All the BS ignore the ratings posts are in support of the most expensive, lowest rated truck. Why not just spend less and get the more capable truck? of spend an extra few hun, and order the extra payload pack on the Ford, and not have to make up pages of BS about how suddenly ratings don't matter. Who cares what's under the hood, what it COSTS TO BUY AND OWN, and what happens when you hit the go pedal, is what really matters. No sure why some are making a religion out of it, and all the excuses that go along with that line of thinking!
Good grief the fanboys are out in full force today.

Speaking of making a religion out of it, since you have all the knowledge, please tell us what exact 0-60 acceleration time is acceptable. Maybe 6.5 seconds, 7.0 seconds, 7.5 seconds, 8.0 seconds, 8.5 seconds, 9.0 seconds? What is it?
Bionic_Man
Explorer
Nov 30, 2014
FishOnOne wrote:
Bionic Man wrote:
Great video Fish. Wonder why they mention fuel economy being important in the video, but they don't actually test it????

I'm glad you enjoyed it BM...

Ford published that video in 7/14 and just recently received EPA numbers so I wouldn't have expected them to publish fuel economy numbers then.

Let's be clear here BM... Ford mentions the truck was designed to be efficient without sacrificing capability!

:B

Or, it could be that they can't compete in fuel economy, so they didn't mention it. Just as they have a significant advantage in the hill climb, so they highlighted that.
Taco
Explorer
Nov 30, 2014
buddyIam wrote:

The Ram loses 45 seconds to the Ford up that hill out of a 700 mile range. What is the Fords range pulling that trailer. I am willing to bet that the Ford will make many more fuel stops over 700 miles while pulling that trailer.

The Ford has a 36 gallon tank, the Ram ED has a 26 so..........