Forum Discussion
- A couple quotes from Edmunds regarding their long term test of the Ram EcoD. They of course don't know as much about their subject as some of our own contributors. After all, this truck is a poor performing, flawed 6000 pound boat anchor.
(quote)
So it should come as no surprise that I reset the Ram's worst tank this month. After all, I towed the lot from Bend, Oregon over Santiam Pass to Eugene and then south along Interstate 5 over numerous other passes until we crested the Siskiyou Summit and rolled down into Yreka, California for a stretch and some more diesel fuel. But that new "worst" tank was still a respectable 17.1 mpg. Not bad for towing in the mountains with what I figure is about 6,000 pounds of added weight, possibly more. And the subsequent all-towing tanks that finished the 1,040-mile trip home were 19.4 and 20.5 mpg.
It would seem that diesel pays its biggest dividends to those that tow.
Evidently the Edmunds staff likes our 2014 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel. I know I certainly do, but it takes more than one fan to reach 20,000 miles in 7.5 months around here.
At its core, the Ram 1500 is my current favorite full-size truck, EcoDiesel or otherwise. I like the 3.6-liter Pentastar V6 engine and the 5.7-liter Hemi V8 just as well. The more I drive any of them I become an even bigger fan of Ram's decision to fit coil spring rear suspension. I quite like the 8-speed automatic transmission, too, even if it does necessitate the use of a rotary shift knob. And the interior and the latest iteration of the U-Connect system are nothing less than fantastic. Hybridhunter wrote:
APT wrote:
I wonder what the acceleration of the base model V6's are with the same 7000 pound trailer? The Chevy 5.3L with 115 more hp than the Ecodiesel is very close 0-40mph towing and only 0.2s slower over a quarter mile. I suspect your lesser torque 300hp V6 won't fare too well.
.
I suppose if you cherry pick numbers, there may be a point there. If you look at the whole picture, cost included, there was one clear winner.
I have no need to defend what I drive, it is what it is. But it is not a 6000# boat anchor either.
Is 0-60 in 6.9 seconds in my 5000# AWD touareg with a V 6 3.0 liter diesel and 240 HP with 406 ft lbs of torque too slow for you? Diesels don't have to be slow. Fact is, I never, in a million years will use that feature. What I do use, when without the trailer is the 60 to 80 mph passing feature. And I can assure you, a turbo diesel in that situation kicks butt without making a fanfare or ruckus in doing so.APT wrote:
I wonder what the acceleration of the base model V6's are with the same 7000 pound trailer? The Chevy 5.3L with 115 more hp than the Ecodiesel is very close 0-40mph towing and only 0.2s slower over a quarter mile. I suspect your lesser torque 300hp V6 won't fare too well.
.
I suppose if you cherry pick numbers, there may be a point there. If you look at the whole picture, cost included, there was one clear winner.
I have no need to defend what I drive, it is what it is. But it is not a 6000# boat anchor either.wintersun wrote:
Wonder how many people noticed that Ford has a new ecoboost engine that replaced the original one and the new one has a lot more power and burns a lot more fuel. What will be of more interest is the actual fuel economy in real world towing with the new engine.
The specs on the 2015 3.5 EB are the same as 2014 and prior years -- 365 hp/420 tq. Any fuel economy gains are due to the lighter weight.wintersun wrote:
Wonder how many people noticed that Ford has a new ecoboost engine that replaced the original one and the new one has a lot more power and burns a lot more fuel.
No, this is wrong. The 3.5 Ecoboost remains. They added a new 2.7 Ecoboost with less power and higher fuel economy.- Wonder how many people noticed that Ford has a new ecoboost engine that replaced the original one and the new one has a lot more power and burns a lot more fuel. What will be of more interest is the actual fuel economy in real world towing with the new engine.
Steering does vary a lot with the 2500/3500 trucks. I did test drives of Ford, Ram, and Chevy trucks and went with the Chevy with its IFS and tighter turning radius. Every time I make a tight turn with the truck and barely make it I am reminded how going with the GM truck and the short bed version was a good choice.
I have a diesel powered truck but my next one is going to be gas. It is too much of a pain having to find places that pump diesel and having to often drive an extra 20 miles round trip with detours to places that sell it. The trick with gas engines for power is the right gears and 4.10 gears have provided me with the best fuel economy and towing performance over the years. Tystevens wrote:
APT wrote:
I don't understand why Hybridhunter dismisses the subjective feel of driving any vehicle with peak torque in the 2000rpm range like the Ecoboosts and every turbocharged diesel. It is very pleasant to accelerate briskly when peak torque is right where then engine typically runs, 1500-2500rpm. No waiting for double, triple gear downshifts (or 5 gears in an 8-spd), just boost - now. I understand the economics of a diesel don't make sense for 95% of even half ton owners.
This is primarily why I bought an Ecoboost, and why I would consider the Ecodiesel if I were shopping today. I find turbo charged engines, gas or diesel, more pleasant to drive, and far, far more pleasant to tow with. I will happily pay a premium for that characteristic. If it happens to get better mpg while doing so, well, that's great.
Towing with my N/A 5.3 becomes so tiresome (especially after becoming accustomed to tow with a diesel and now the Ecoboost), with all the revving and downshifting and all of that. I much prefer 1800 rpm and 6th gear, even if I'm not going any faster!
And this is why I bought my Touareg TDI with a 3.0 TDI motor, 5000 lbs of SUV, and 406 ft lbs of torque, to trailer with. It does fine when trailering, and the mpg's are outstanding when the trailer is disconnected, which is most of the time.
But this RAM, to me, looks and test drives impressive. The only thing I don't like about it was I almost clipped a sign on the outside of a turn getting on the freeway on ramp, doing a test drive. The steering needs to be a lot sharper, it takes way too much input turning the steering wheel to get the front end to turn. Going from my Passat sedan back and forth to the RAM would be a bit dangerous, it needs sharper turning capability with less steering wheel input.APT wrote:
I don't understand why Hybridhunter dismisses the subjective feel of driving any vehicle with peak torque in the 2000rpm range like the Ecoboosts and every turbocharged diesel. It is very pleasant to accelerate briskly when peak torque is right where then engine typically runs, 1500-2500rpm. No waiting for double, triple gear downshifts (or 5 gears in an 8-spd), just boost - now. I understand the economics of a diesel don't make sense for 95% of even half ton owners.
This is primarily why I bought an Ecoboost, and why I would consider the Ecodiesel if I were shopping today. I find turbo charged engines, gas or diesel, more pleasant to drive, and far, far more pleasant to tow with. I will happily pay a premium for that characteristic. If it happens to get better mpg while doing so, well, that's great.
Towing with my N/A 5.3 becomes so tiresome (especially after becoming accustomed to tow with a diesel and now the Ecoboost), with all the revving and downshifting and all of that. I much prefer 1800 rpm and 6th gear, even if I'm not going any faster!- I wonder what the acceleration of the base model V6's are with the same 7000 pound trailer? The Chevy 5.3L with 115 more hp than the Ecodiesel is very close 0-40mph towing and only 0.2s slower over a quarter mile. I suspect your lesser torque 300hp V6 won't fare too well.
I don't understand why Hybridhunter dismisses the subjective feel of driving any vehicle with peak torque in the 2000rpm range like the Ecoboosts and every turbocharged diesel. It is very pleasant to accelerate briskly when peak torque is right where then engine typically runs, 1500-2500rpm. No waiting for double, triple gear downshifts (or 5 gears in an 8-spd), just boost - now. I understand the economics of a diesel don't make sense for 95% of even half ton owners. I agree payload for all 2009+ Ram half tons doesn't work for most RVers. But bench racing WOT acceleration plays little part is the real world of vehicle owners, even towing.
Regardless, everyone knows where you stand on the ED. Despite all the statistics, Ram sells more of them than Ford/GM/Ram base V6s combined with at least 50% higher transaction prices. APT wrote:
To the point, any truck that takes 1/2 a mile a over half a minute to get to highway speed
You really do exaggerate and state options as if they were facts. This is why people keep calling you out. 81MPH trap speed in quarter mile according to the linked article.
Towing my friend......Which I inferred when I said in the same sentence, "with nothing let for payload".
I don't disagree that some may find the performance adequate, but all else being equal, better performance, or in this case drastically better performance for the same or less money, is, um better.
And as such, I would never buy a slower truck than I have now. It is terribly odd to many "a half ton can't tow" or a 'V6 doesn't belong in a truck", or "base V6 engines aren't any good for towing". Yet the ED is? I'll take my lesser torque 300+hp for everyday driving, and those times when I need 300hp, over the 240/420 of the ED 8 days a week. Or the 3.6 in the Ram, which is a shining star or value and performance.
