Ram 2500 6.4L 12.5K Ike Gauntlet

I for one really,really,really do not care about these silly test. Just my opinion.

The Ford 6.2/3.73 did well in the pickuptrucks.com testing on the Eisenhower grade. I see no reason why that would change.

What are the chances Ford will cough up a truck with 4.30 rear for the test. I'd even settle for a 3.73 because, based on the numbers, it should do as well or better than the GM.

Buck50HD wrote:
The weakness of the 6.4's 1st and 2nd gear have been exposed. It's not a mystery.

My favorite part of the video is the 6.7 Super Duty with a trailer blowing by like they're standing still (21:52).

When the air is thin and grade gets steep, it's all about gear ratios. A 4.30 Ford 6.2 would most likely dominate this test.

On the other hand, there are combinations of loads and grades where the 6.4 will dominate.

I saw that 6.7 PSD and I wasn't going to mention it here but since you pointed it out... :B

I suspect part of the reason the Hemi struggled is because a naturally aspirated gas engine really looses a lot of power at higher altitudes, but having said that RAM had a field day and allowed the media to test a 4500/5500 Chassis cab with a snow plow on the front and it appeared to have struggled as well.

ScottG wrote:

RCMAN46 wrote:

ScottG wrote:

blderman wrote:

ordually wrote:
TFLTruck did a Ike Gauntlet tow test of a 2015 Ram 6.4L 4.10.

Identical axle ratio and load (12.5K) to the 2015 Chevy 2500 they tested a few months ago. The Chevy gives up ~50hp and lb-ft. Surprising outcome.

I don't read the article as they weighed the same. I read it as they were within 100lbs of their GCVW. If that is actually the case then the Ram weighed 2,000lbs more. It still doesn't justify that 2nd gear is inadequate but it would definitely make a big difference.

That's a good point. If they weren't loaded the same then the results are meaningless.

It would be nice if everyone would take the time to view the video and pay attention. If you did you would know both trucks were towing the same load with in 100 lbs.

I did watch the Video but I missed that point. So what? That's why we have civil discussions - or at least try to.

Are you a acussing me of not being civil?

I only pointed out if everyone would watch and pay attention to the video they would not be making false statements.

That is still being done if you read posts after I pointed this out. It seams there are still some who believe the Ram was towing more weight than the Chevrolet.

Bottom line the Ram was not able to make as much horsepower as the Chevrolet.

The weakness of the 6.4's 1st and 2nd gear have been exposed. It's not a mystery.

My favorite part of the video is the 6.7 Super Duty with a trailer blowing by like they're standing still (21:52).

When the air is thin and grade gets steep, it's all about gear ratios. A 4.30 Ford 6.2 would most likely dominate this test.

On the other hand, there are combinations of loads and grades where the 6.4 will dominate.

Here are the graphic representations of the results for all of the testing done by Pickuptrucks.com - excluding the Eisenhower tunnel test:













See what I mean? Ram takes first place over and over. Loaded, empty, uphill, on the flats, always fastest.

Is isn't until they test it on the Eisenhower Tunnel grade (same as used by TFLTruck in their "Ike Gauntlet" test) that the Ram was slower. I chalked it up to the fact that it was carrying between 2000# and 3000# more than the GM and Ford because they loaded all the trucks up to 90% of their GCWR and the Ram has a much higher GCWR so it had much more weight.

It appears though, that it was the extra weight AND something to do with the engine programming for high elevations.

Here is the Eisenhower tunnel test done by PUTC:



And the note that followed the description of their Eisenhower tunnel grade towing test:

"How We Did the Testing

We knew we wanted to do something special here, so we opted to run each truck as close to its manufacturer-stated GCWR — meaning all it can carry and tow. Simply put, we wanted to see how well or poorly they performed at their limits. We know most people aren't likely to do this kind of towing (and if they did, they'd probably buy a one-ton dualie turbo-diesel), but how well a pickup does near its limits is likely to say a lot about how well it will do when things aren't so tough.

Our trailer for this event, when empty weighs, about 6,000 pounds but we had two 330-gallon water tanks (each weighing 2,800 pounds) wedged inside, bringing the total weight close to 12,000 pounds, near but not over each truck's stated maximum conventional tow ratings.

The F-250's GCWR is 19,000 pounds; the Chevy's is just more than 20,000 pounds, and the Ram 2500's is just more than 22,000 pounds. We attempted to adjust each max trailer weight by dumping a certain amount of water from each truck or trailer, getting as close as possible to 90 percent of the vehicle's GCWR number."

ordually wrote:

ib516 wrote:
Here's what was added by the guys from TFL in the comments:


Ram Truck “invented” the first gear hold feature – and calibrated it – to avoid gear hunting and driving at excessively high rpm’s.
Ike is a variable grade and we worked hard to develop a calibration that appropriately manages torque on the run and other grades.

We don’t want the truck to rev high for extended periods of time and purposely hold 4,200 rpm.


Seems like there's some designed in limiting by the PCM/ECM going on here.

Interesting. I wonder what the Ram powertrain engineering folks would say about needing to avoid more than a sustained 4200RPM. Cooling limitation? BMEP? Transmission limitation? Rating a motor at 5600 RPM and only using 3/4s of the HP is surprising. I wonder how the PCM would know to enforce limit, as it would be too obvious to do it on the 1-2 upshift, and way too obvious to just pull fuel from the driver when holding in first to bring RPM from say 5000 back to 4200. Perhaps only on the 2-1 downshift then it applies the 4200?

IB516--have you noticed any PCM/ECM limitations along the lines of what Ram described in your towings?

I have no idea why they designed that in.

I have never felt anything like it when using my truck to tow my 12k RV. Mine has downshifted to second gear and revved past 5000 RPM when going up mountain grades in the Canadian Rockies (7%) and accelerated. The grades weren't nearly as long as the Ike Gauntlet though. Also, I have never been above 8000' elevation yet with my truck either.

Mine didn't seem to gain any significant engine or transmission temp when pulling hard either (both are available in digital format right to the degree so they are easy to monitor), so I can't see it being a cooling capacity issue.

The 6.4L Hemi showed it's performance potential when tested against the competition on the Davis Dam grade (lower elevation) and in other tests done at lower elevations (Michigan) where it clearly outperformed the competition during the Pickuptrucks.com testing. So by that, I think it might have something to do with the extreme elevation.

It's all just speculation. What I do know is I have been very pleased with the way mine performs so far - towing and empty. In the grand scheme of things, we are talking what - 90 seconds over 8 miles?...and maybe only when at 10,000 feet? :?

ordually wrote:

ib516 wrote:
Here's what was added by the guys from TFL in the comments:


Ram Truck “invented” the first gear hold feature – and calibrated it – to avoid gear hunting and driving at excessively high rpm’s.
Ike is a variable grade and we worked hard to develop a calibration that appropriately manages torque on the run and other grades.

We don’t want the truck to rev high for extended periods of time and purposely hold 4,200 rpm.


Seems like there's some designed in limiting by the PCM/ECM going on here.

Interesting. I wonder what the Ram powertrain engineering folks would say about needing to avoid more than a sustained 4200RPM. Cooling limitation? BMEP? Transmission limitation? Rating a motor at 5600 RPM and only using 3/4s of the HP is surprising. I wonder how the PCM would know to enforce limit, as it would be too obvious to do it on the 1-2 upshift, and way too obvious to just pull fuel from the driver when holding in first to bring RPM from say 5000 back to 4200. Perhaps only on the 2-1 downshift then it applies the 4200?

IB516--have you noticed any PCM/ECM limitations along the lines of what Ram described in your towings?

Total BS! There was not enough power to pull through first gear to get to second... The thing I don't understand is that people buy this statement.. I've got some beautiful beach front property in Antarctica to sell you, cheap!

katoom400 wrote:

dreeder wrote:
Huh, other than the cylinder deactivation, I can't see a reason to choose the 6.4 over the 5.7.

I have not driven a 5.7 Hemi, but I do have a Tundra with the 5.7 and it did a awesome job pulling my ~7000lb trailer up a very steep grade leaving the campground last weekend. I was holding 60mph @ ~3000rpm and nobody felt the need to pass me even though I was in the slow lane.

if the Hemi is as good as the I-Force 5.7 then I think it would be a fine choice for a gas motor in a 2500.

The reasons I'm looking at the 6.4 would be the cylinder deactivation when empty (95% of the time for me) and the torque coming on 1000 rpm earlier than the 5.7, leads me to believe it would not have to rev as high climbing grades or off the line.

I did test drive a new 6.4 with 3.73's and I was not impressed with off the line torque compared to the Tundra (4.30's). 4.10 gears probably would have changed that for the Ram.

It's a tough call on the 6.4...fairly new motor, possibly better mileage/torque. the 5.7 is a known commodity and seems to be up to the task. However someone coming off a diesel would likely want as much torque as they could get in a gas motor and I would think the 6.4/4.10 combo would be the better choice for the $1500 difference.

Would I like the 6.7 oil burner? Absolutely, but not for the $8k cost of admission given I'm running unloaded 95% of the time and live in the cold north east. I had a f250 with the 7.3 and it was great when I was towing, but really it was just loud, expensive and a general PIA in the winter months. If I lived and a warmer area, or towed heavy loads more often it would be different.

I had a 12' Ram 2500 and it did what I asked it to, obviously not like the 6.7 Cummins that I had before it, but it worked without complaints. I have been toying with going back to another Ram with the 6.4 but with the current deals going on the 5.7 Hemi's, I am not sure there would be a noticeable performance gain to justify choosing the 6.4 over the 5.7.