New Ram/Cummins vs GM/Duramax on the IKE

The 10 speed was going to be the save all, now it's demise is the lowly 3.42's. :R

rhagfo wrote:
Weel seeing how the engines are about the same and the biggest difference is the GM had the 10 speed and 3.42 (Tall gears), and the Ram had the Aisin and 4.10's (Low gears), I would say the 10 speed in a GM 3500 DRW will get better mileage, depending on engine RPMs. I now turn about 1,500 with the Aisin and 3.73's at 60 mph, our old 2001 turned 1,800 RPMs at 60 mph with 3.55's, so final OD is taller.

Assuming the fuel mileage readings are accurate on these two trucks I would have thought the duramax would have made better fuel mileage but that wasn't the case. It will be interesting when the drw trucks will be tested at maximum capacity

Cummins12V98 wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:
Hmm, and it appears that GM will only be offering a 3.42 rear end with the diesels in both SRW and DRW versions. So I would not expect a much different outcome with the 3500 DRW version of this truck other than it weighing slightly more than what was used.

Old news Buddy.

Well judging by some of the comments, it appears that I am not alone in not knowing that.

Weel seeing how the engines are about the same and the biggest difference is the GM had the 10 speed and 3.42 (Tall gears), and the Ram had the Aisin and 4.10's (Low gears), I would say the 10 speed in a GM 3500 DRW will get better mileage, depending on engine RPMs. I now turn about 1,500 with the Aisin and 3.73's at 60 mph, our old 2001 turned 1,800 RPMs at 60 mph with 3.55's, so final OD is taller.

ShinerBock wrote:
Hmm, and it appears that GM will only be offering a 3.42 rear end with the diesels in both SRW and DRW versions. So I would not expect a much different outcome with the 3500 DRW version of this truck other than it weighing slightly more than what was used.

Old news Buddy.

ib516 wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:

If this new cummins HP is understated then one can say that about the Duramax used in this test.

I don't follow your logic. :?

The Duramax is rated at 445 hp, the Cummins is rated at 400 hp. The Cummins had about 700# more weight and lower hp and made the same time.

Cummins simply puts a higher percentage of advertised HP to the ground.

FishOnOne wrote:

Cummins12V98 wrote:
Too funny on these AISIN "SLOW SHIFTING" comments and the such. Not sure what it's supposed to do. Mine works flawlessly with ZERO dead pedal or shifting issues.

I suppose for the '19 trucks Aisin didn't make improvements to the shifting for no apparent reason.

I drove a 19 DRW RAM. I RAN THE HELL OUT OF IT. It shifted no different than mine. It had no more notice power. I did have the traction control on. Didn’t think to turn it off.

wnjj wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:
Hmm, and it appears that GM will only be offering a 3.42 rear end with the diesels in both SRW and DRW versions. So I would not expect a much different outcome with the 3500 DRW version of this truck other than it weighing slightly more than what was used.

Are the DRW tires the same diameter as the SRW?

I posted a link to Mr. Trucks interview of a GM engineer. He stated the brakes are essentially the same do to the 17" tires.

wnjj wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:
Hmm, and it appears that GM will only be offering a 3.42 rear end with the diesels in both SRW and DRW versions. So I would not expect a much different outcome with the 3500 DRW version of this truck other than it weighing slightly more than what was used.

Are the DRW tires the same diameter as the SRW?

Not sure, all it says is that the DRW 3500 diesel is 551 lbs heavier than the 2500 diesel. I would not imagine the tire diameter is that much smaller or the extra 551 lbs would make a significant difference in the outcome.

ShinerBock wrote:

RCMAN46 wrote:


Can you provide a link to your source for the gear ratios.

CHEVROLET DEBUTS ALL-NEW 2020 SILVERADO HD

Thank You I did a lot of searching and not find that one. A lot of good information on that link.