Forum Discussion
- Buzzcut1Nomad II
RZAR66 wrote:
RamTC wrote:
Gripnriprod wrote:
jimh425 wrote:
Many oil-burner owners, in part, justify the added expense because diesels get slightly better mileage than gassers - typically enough to make up the price difference of the fuel. When you add in the enhanced performance of the high torque engines in the these HD trucks, we can readily talk ourselves into the purchase of diesels.
What would we figure?
Really it comes down to personal preference.
Checkout the TFL video with the Ram gasser. With only a 12K trailer, can only pull in 2nd gear, then never leaves 1st to under 30mph. Then go watch the Cummins with a 24K trailer on the same run, end of gas vs. diesel threads :W
http://www.tfltruck.com/2014/10/2014-ram-2500-hd-6-4l-hemi-and-gear-hold-feature-ike-gauntlet-video/
I guess when they start making 12K pound TC's then I will start thinking Diesel.
or if you tow a horse trailer or a jeep on a trailer or a box with ATVs behind it - ScottGNomadSomewhere at Ram there is an engineer (I'm thinking it's an old one) who has over the years neutered the low end power of Dodge and Ram HD trucks (gas or diesel) for more than a decade. He/She does this in some misguided attempt at "saving the power train". The aftermarket even has a device that disables this um.. "feature".
Even my own Dodge has it and wont allow full power until I hit third gear (I believe it's second in the autos but not sure).
The thing is, I don't think it's needed and it's killing performance. Luckily for the competition they don't share this arcane thinking.
The latest system results in a big lie. Ram states the HP rating at 5600 RPM but since it won't hold that RPM in low gear, the HP is quite a bit less.
If I were in the market for a big gasser and was making my buying decision based on performance alone, I would buy something else. - sky_freeExplorerIt was very interesting to see their numbers with the exact same TC that we have, the AF 990. Their CAT scale ticket was exactly 20 lbs less than ours. They have the same 3.73 gears. They reported average mpg's in "low to mid 10's". Assuming that means approx 10.3 mpg, that is about 0.2 better than we are getting with the 6.2 Ford. Virtually a tie on fuel efficiency, but the Ford doesn't have cylinder deactivation which would help if you drive around empty a lot, and has less power of course.
- RZAR66Explorer
RamTC wrote:
Gripnriprod wrote:
jimh425 wrote:
Many oil-burner owners, in part, justify the added expense because diesels get slightly better mileage than gassers - typically enough to make up the price difference of the fuel. When you add in the enhanced performance of the high torque engines in the these HD trucks, we can readily talk ourselves into the purchase of diesels.
What would we figure?
Really it comes down to personal preference.
Checkout the TFL video with the Ram gasser. With only a 12K trailer, can only pull in 2nd gear, then never leaves 1st to under 30mph. Then go watch the Cummins with a 24K trailer on the same run, end of gas vs. diesel threads :W
http://www.tfltruck.com/2014/10/2014-ram-2500-hd-6-4l-hemi-and-gear-hold-feature-ike-gauntlet-video/
I guess when they start making 12K pound TC's then I will start thinking Diesel. - RamTCExplorer
Gripnriprod wrote:
jimh425 wrote:
Many oil-burner owners, in part, justify the added expense because diesels get slightly better mileage than gassers - typically enough to make up the price difference of the fuel. When you add in the enhanced performance of the high torque engines in the these HD trucks, we can readily talk ourselves into the purchase of diesels.
What would we figure?
Really it comes down to personal preference.
Checkout the TFL video with the Ram gasser. With only a 12K trailer, can only pull in 2nd gear, then never leaves 1st to under 30mph. Then go watch the Cummins with a 24K trailer on the same run, end of gas vs. diesel threads :W
http://www.tfltruck.com/2014/10/2014-ram-2500-hd-6-4l-hemi-and-gear-hold-feature-ike-gauntlet-video/ - RZAR66ExplorerI am experiencing the same numbers as TCM is. I have almost the same truck as they do with the exception of my trucks 4.10 vs. their 3.73 rear end.
- jmtandemExplorer IIAnything over 10 mpg carrying 4500-5000+ pounds of cabover camper would be more than acceptable to me for a gas engine. And some of the magazine's truck mileage was in the Rockies so lots of climbing and descending. The 6.4 with 429 foot pounds of torque is actually more than the first generation of Cummins in the Dodge trucks that were rated at 400 foot pounds. It is an impressive gas engine!
- kohldadExplorer IIIFantastic report and good timing. I knew the original numbers were not hand calculated and thus optimistic but was hoping they would prove out. The hand calculated average of 11 mpg at 62 mph is still 10% better than my estimate so I'll be happy with them.
So I will continue with my plans to buy a Ram 3500 with the 6.4 gasser. - ScottGNomadWell I see things haven't changed with the overhead Lie-O-meters LOL!
Good review though. Lots of useful info, no drag racing. - GripnriprodExplorer
jimh425 wrote:
Many oil-burner owners, in part, justify the added expense because diesels get slightly better mileage than gassers - typically enough to make up the price difference of the fuel. When you add in the enhanced performance of the high torque engines in the these HD trucks, we can readily talk ourselves into the purchase of diesels.
What would we figure?
Really it comes down to personal preference.
About Travel Trailer Group
44,029 PostsLatest Activity: Jan 28, 2025