RAM 2500 6.4L Towing Observations

Interesting that Chrysler offers a lifetime, unlimited extended warrantee on a gas truck but do not offer it on a diesel.

My 2006 engine was running like a peach.....everything else was failing at 200,000 miles. AC Compressor, rear end, alternator, exhaust, cooling lines, transmission, etc.

ShinerBock wrote:

Rustycamperpants wrote:
OP, thanks for the posting. I have thought too that I would like to have a 3/4 ton, I dont even care which of the big three since all seem capable. Im glad you like your truck, congratulations.

For those of you that have diesels, aren't maintenance costs much higher and shouldnt that be figured in as well? Im not trying to stir the pot, I am genuninely interested. As I read about diesels they sound very expensive to keep up. Just the two batteries alone that I see under the hood freaks me out a bit.

Again thanks OP.

That depends on the brand.

For a Ram, due to the MDS and other tech(not you typical old fashioned V8) it requires expensive oil every 7-8k. A Cummins PM is more expensive due to the dual fuel filters, but the interval is every 15k so the PM costs are about the same between the two. Most people only look at the individual cost of a PM and forget that the intervals are much longer on the diesel. Moat current diesels have a 100k miles warranty which should take car of any issues in the first 4-5 years.

Fuel cost are another thing that many people get wrong. They thing that because diesel costs more then then it evens out. The truth is that with the a 3-4 mpg difference between them, diesel has to be around $.68-.78 cents higher just for the cost per mile be even between the two if gas is at around $2.75. If fuel prices go up, say $3.25, then the difference would have to be $.81-.94 cents higher to have the same cost per mile.

Most of the up front cost is usually recouped at trade in just like any other option that adds value to a vehicle over one without said option. The rest is generally recouped through the added fuel mileage.

At around 200k-350k is where most of your major repairs may come due on a diesel depending on the brand of coarse. I believe this is what scares most people off. But again, they fail to look at the fact that at this point, most gas engine in the same duty cycle will have to be replaced or are worthless by the time you hit this mileage.

Thank you. I will keep on reading and learning. Currently this would be my daily driver as well, I could be a few years out but Im getting the itch....

Rustycamperpants wrote:
OP, thanks for the posting. I have thought too that I would like to have a 3/4 ton, I dont even care which of the big three since all seem capable. Im glad you like your truck, congratulations.

For those of you that have diesels, aren't maintenance costs much higher and shouldnt that be figured in as well? Im not trying to stir the pot, I am genuninely interested. As I read about diesels they sound very expensive to keep up. Just the two batteries alone that I see under the hood freaks me out a bit.

Again thanks OP.

That depends on the brand.

For a Ram, due to the MDS and other tech(not you typical old fashioned V8) it requires expensive oil every 7-8k. A Cummins PM is more expensive due to the dual fuel filters, but the interval is every 15k so the PM costs are about the same between the two. Most people only look at the individual cost of a PM and forget that the intervals are much longer on the diesel. Most current diesels have a 100k miles warranty which should take car of any issues in the first 4-5 years.

Fuel cost are another thing that many people get wrong. They think that because diesel costs more then it evens out. The truth is that with the a 3-4 mpg difference between them, diesel has to be around $.68-.78 cents higher just for the cost per mile be even between the two if gas is at around $2.75. If fuel prices go up, say $3.25, then the difference would have to be $.81-.94 cents higher to have the same cost per mile.

Most of the up front cost is usually recouped at trade in just like any other option that adds value to a vehicle over one without said option. The rest is generally recouped through the added fuel mileage.

At around 200k-350k is where most of your major repairs may come due on a diesel depending on the brand of coarse. I believe this is what scares most people off. But again, they fail to look at the fact that at this point, most gas engine in the same duty cycle will have to be replaced or are worthless by the time you hit this mileage.

OP, thanks for the posting. I have thought too that I would like to have a 3/4 ton, I dont even care which of the big three since all seem capable. Im glad you like your truck, congratulations.

For those of you that have diesels, aren't maintenance costs much higher and shouldnt that be figured in as well? Im not trying to stir the pot, I am genuninely interested. As I read about diesels they sound very expensive to keep up. Just the two batteries alone that I see under the hood freaks me out a bit.

Again thanks OP.

jmtandem wrote:

So we, the audience, cannot point out errors in an articles if the auther is "super excited" about what he is writing about? I am pretty sure he would give constructive criticism and correct another writer if they posted wrong info about a gun or wrong RV specs.

For somebody that made the first comments on the original article and pointed out all the mistakes in calculating percentages and fuel usage, you tend to be a little thin skinned when folks make other comments or observations; none of which says you are or were wrong.

Again, 4700 pounds of trailer is nothing for either engine. Had the OP been towing 12,000 pounds of fifth wheel I am sure the difference between his 6.4 engine and a new diesel would have been dramatically different and would only have supported your position more.

I pulled a 12k 5er with a 5.9L Cummins in a 2007 3500 SRW and then the same 5er with a 2014 Ram 2500 with the 6.4L Hemi. The Cummins got 10-12 mpg and the 6.4L Hemi got 7-9 mpg with the same load.

OP thanks for posting your real world experience with the 6.4. While the debate will always rage on, its nice to see a post on a positive note for a gas rig. I have a GM 6.0 gas, and frankly really like it. I have pulled with both and prefer gas now. I know everyone always says diesel is better in the long run. I get that, but not many want to purchase a used 200k mile diesel now, at least that’s in my area. I know that I would not, u know most program them and run them hard. Plus the rest of the rig has 200k plus so stuff breaks.......hence I be sticking with gas. Easy for me to keep up. I’m not going to purchase another truck anytime soon. If I were then the 6.4 would be in the mix for sure. Enjoy your new truck!

I am not mad at what your saying. I am just trying to understand it. From what you state it is like I should not have pointed out the one and only mistake I did because he was "super excited" about what he was writing about. So I should have not said anything and let it lie?

I don't think you did or said anything wrong. And I have consistently said that. And your comments probably needed to be said. But, the other side of the coin is that the OP also did say a lot of things that he liked about the truck even if his fuel mileage calculations were not accurate. And, again, had the OP been towing 12,000 pounds or more the conclusions you make about fuel calculations would be more valid not less so. And lastly I am not pointing out any faults or am I upset about anything you said or did not say. Just that there is another side to this coin.

jmtandem wrote:

So we, the audience, cannot point out errors in an articles if the auther is "super excited" about what he is writing about? I am pretty sure he would give constructive criticism and correct another writer if they posted wrong info about a gun or wrong RV specs.

For somebody that made the first comments on the original article and pointed out all the mistakes in calculating percentages and fuel usage, you tend to be a little thin skinned when folks make other comments or observations; none of which says you are or were wrong.

I am not mad at what your saying. I am just trying to understand it. From what you state it is like I should not have pointed out the one and only mistake I did because he was "super excited" about what he was writing about. So I should have not said anything and let it lie?

So we, the audience, cannot point out errors in an articles if the auther is "super excited" about what he is writing about? I am pretty sure he would give constructive criticism and correct another writer if they posted wrong info about a gun or wrong RV specs.

For somebody that made the first comments on the original article and pointed out all the mistakes in calculating percentages and fuel usage, you tend to be a little thin skinned when folks make other comments or observations; none of which says you are or were wrong.

Again, 4700 pounds of trailer is nothing for either engine. Had the OP been towing 12,000 pounds of fifth wheel I am sure the difference between his 6.4 engine and a new diesel would have been dramatically different and would only have supported your position more.

jmtandem wrote:

While your points are well taken about journalists taking a bias on a position and then presenting the facts to sort of support or prove their point, this is a little different. This is just a guy (not a journalist) super excited about a trip he took in his truck even if some of his inference and assertions of facts do not stand up to statistical scrutiny.

So we, the audience, cannot point out errors in an articles if the auther is "super excited" about what he is writing about? I am pretty sure he would give constructive criticism and correct another writer if they posted wrong info about a gun or wrong RV specs.

To the OP, nice Blog BTW.