Forum Discussion
hone eagle wrote:
So Chrysler knows very well what the numbers are.
Which makes one wonder why they are not talking....
2 Possible scenarios come to mind:
1. Not hitting targets to "blow everyone away" so they are figuring how. (and from what has been reported, it's not Earth-shattering)
2. They are blowing everyone away and want to keep hype up.
I vote for #1 - there is no excuse to not talk #'s this late in the game. Or even say "We expect and EPA 25/30"... Yet there is nothing at all.- The EPA does not test cars/trucks ,they issue standards and the manufacturers do the testing -on their honour.
Works well for the most part.
They do however pick at random vehicles to 'verify ' (keeps everybody honest)
So Chrysler knows very well what the numbers are. itguy08 wrote:
Where are these released figures? I saw some speculation and this in the first linked article:At a first drive press launch for the truck last week Ram was coy on fuel economy estimates but did say the truck would best the V6 model’s already best-in-class numbers of 18 MPG city, 25 MPG highway and 20 MPG combined.
Nothing concrete; only vague comments and lots of speculation. My guess is that it is not that great or they would release it now.
It may also have to do with getting approval from the EPA. Don't all 1/2 trucks have to get tested by the EPA?- Where are these released figures? I saw some speculation and this in the first linked article:
At a first drive press launch for the truck last week Ram was coy on fuel economy estimates but did say the truck would best the V6 model’s already best-in-class numbers of 18 MPG city, 25 MPG highway and 20 MPG combined.
Nothing concrete; only vague comments and lots of speculation. My guess is that it is not that great or they would release it now. aedubber wrote:
Did they release payload numbers for it ? That is more important then mpg , since you will have great mpg if your towing a light trailer due to limited tongue weight .
It's a Dodge Ram so expect the bottom of the class in payload and towing.- Did they release payload numbers for it ? That is more important then mpg , since you will have great mpg if your towing a light trailer due to limited tongue weight .
- I'd give it a couple of years in production before jumping on the bandwagon, and then I'd be checking forums very carefully to see what issues are cropping up. Bought a Liberty CRD and the issues were downright scary along with dealers that didn't know what to do with them. It did tow our boat beautifully, but never got the advertised mileage no matter how hard I tried. Sold it to a guy in Canada that was thrilled to have it, but I was glad to be rid of it. What I'm saying is Chrysler has messed this up once before, so my advice is to not buy their prototype.
- Nice to see good mpg. I will really consider it if I buy a 1/2 ton. For those that don't tow however, the low cost, good power and good mpg of the Pentastar V6 is pretty tempting.
- The reaction to the 2014 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel pickup truck has been so enthusiastic that Chrysler is starting to wonder if it will be able to fill demand. Link to Edmunds.com
Ram made sure to emphasize that the engine isn't betraying legions of Cummins fans out there, who if faced upon any uncertainty might storm into Auburn Hills, 3500 Duallies burping and blazing with the cacophony of Patton's 2nd Armored. Where the 6.7-liter Cummins inline-six diesel snorts and rumbles, a four-wheeled Harley-Davidson (that can trailer behind it up to 38 Road Kings), the 1500's Italian diesel is quiet, nonintrusive.
The fine people at Ram put us upon the most devilishly twisty road in all of Malibu, a road so slow and windy that sports car drivers are reluctant to unwind on it. (One can replicate this experience by seesawing aberrantly through a parking garage at 3 in the morning.) Hard on the brakes, moderate acceleration every few seconds. Through this Trial By Twisties, the optional air suspension on our Ram made an admirable effort at preventing nausea from all occupants. (We later drove up the same path on conventional coil-sprung 1500s, which wafted slightly more but still felt collected and controllable. "Carlike" might seem like a pejorative word, but in both cases it's in fact a boon.) And after a stint on the long and lazy Pacific Coast Highway, we hit a mixture of 22.3 mpg. This was an average figure for us, though one member in our Ram 1500 motorcade hit an applause-worthy 27 mpg. The people at Ram may have awarded him a cookie.
Link Autoweek
I think I may not get the Challenger after all. Maybe a 4X4 CC Longhorn for Christmas!
Don Bionic Man wrote:
nah this thread is safe because it isn't a Ford thread.
And, the RAM haters will be here in 5.....4.......3.......2......1
