Are the 2016 Ram HD’s Output Figures Bogus?

[45Ricochet]

CLICKY

[IdaD]

Double post.

[Bedlam]

Unless there is coversion chart between different standards, you cannot compare results between different standards. My 6.0 PSD and 6.7 CTD have the same horsepower rating but the CTD has more torque according to different standards. The PSD was able to accelerate faster but the CTD holds the speed better on hills when both were loaded to the same GCW. The point is to drive the ones that interest you and let your butt dyno tell you which one is better for your style of driving and terrain.

[IdaD]

FishOnOne wrote:

I agree they definitely feel different and I would add a big part of that comes from 68 tranny hunting for gears and the dead pedal was absolutely horrendous to the point it almost felt dangerous when pulling out into traffic.

I haven't driven the '15 Fords but the reports I've read say they have a bit more turbo lag than the '11-'14 but the power feels stronger.

The 68RFE has been great so far. It shifts hard at times but it doesn't hunt at all, and it does a great job with a load in tow/haul mode in conjunction with the exhaust brake. It is an auto and I debated whether I wanted to go down to two pedals since I haven't had an auto as my daily driver since I was a teenager, but I've been real happy with it. You do give up a degree of control with an auto but that's the case with all of them.

I've experienced the dead pedal about twice and it isn't a very long lag, and it only happens in a very specific scenario where you get on the throttle, get off it and then get back on it hard in a very quick sequence. Avoid that and it's a non-issue, and it isn't a common scenario in normal driving.

The big reasons I went with the Ram over the Ford is I have a great deal more trust in the Cummins in terms of long term reliability, and the frame on the Ford is a wet noodle compared to the Ram or GM. It felt like a 20 year old truck with a modern drivetrain.

[Perrysburg_Dodg]

Tory Tory Troy try and read this slowly OK. The thread is about whether Rams engine numbers are Bogus. It was your Ford boy Levine that brought up the fact that Ford is not J2807 with all of their trucks Troy. This is so typical of you, when faced with facts all you can do is try and change the subject and claim that I need to control my "Angst". Pot meet Kettle LOL

Don

[spoon059]

kennethwooster wrote:
We have plenty of HP and torque, so wish they would leave a good thing alone.

Exactly... at this point you are better off spending that money on penile enhancement surgery if you need to feel better about yourself, rather than $60K on a new truck so you can have 10 more lbs/ft of torque then the guy with the *other* brand truck.

[kennethwooster]

Back in the farm equip. business, I watched this competition. Up Hp, and etc. but not put in larger engine and etc. As a result they hit the peak and things began to fall apart. Farmers became very upset and as a dealer it was a real pain. We have plenty of HP and torque, so wish they would leave a good thing alone.

[spoon059]

stro1965 wrote:
My 3.73 geared 2012 F250 certainly was faster than my 3.42 geared 2015 3500. I love the Ram but wish there were some other gearing options.

I'm not certain, but I believe the Ram is geared for towing/hauling power, not racing.

[ShinerBock]

FishOnOne wrote:


BTW... Shiner I made a trip to the deer camp last weekend (I10) and made a solid 20 mpg.

I am just about to head out to make the three hour trip down to the deer lease in Encinal to fill feeders. I usually get 17-18 mpg (lie-o-meter) doing 75 mph. I used to show 20 mpg back when I had stock tires although back then my speedo was a bit off too saying I was getting better mileage than actual. I have learned throughout the years to never trust the lie-o-meter or go by what it states, and just go by hand calculated which I do every fill up with my Acar app.

[stro1965]

My 3.73 geared 2012 F250 certainly was faster than my 3.42 geared 2015 3500. I love the Ram but wish there were some other gearing options.

[GoPackGo]

mowermech wrote:

Chrysler Corporation has historically set their horsepower numbers below the actual dynomometer numbers.
Take the 440 Magnum and 426 Hemi, for instance. In actual dyno tests of bone-stock engines in the late '60s/early '70s, they were shown to have much more HP and torque than the advertising claims.

Great engines for sure, but the reason they were underrated was because the insurance companies starting jacking up the rates for 'muscle cars' at exactly that time (What a coincidence !). So the Big Three started fudging on the HP ratings so all us youngsters would still be able to afford their cars. Chrysler wasn't alone in doing this.

A completely different situation then nowadays.

[FishOnOne]

Thanks Shiner and J2Shy for chiming in as I respect your input and experiences.

I would say the dead pedal on the cummins is very similar to my 6.0 PSD. The time I drove a few '13 rams were brand new on the lot so perhaps the learning strategy wasn't refined therefore the gear hunting.

BTW... Shiner I made a trip to the deer camp last weekend (I10) and made a solid 20 mpg.

[Lessmore]

I think HP/Torque ratings are generally accurate nowadays. But then when I read the following link, which was contained in the OP's story link...it does sometimes make you wonder.

What makes me wonder, was that in the HD diesel pick up test...granted of 2015 trucks...the lowest rated truck in power, the GM (GMC) was the quickest in the 1/4 mile.

No, I didn't look at final drive ratios, # of gears, transmission gear ratios, weight, power to weight, etc., of each truck.

But looking at the 1/4 mile times...it does seem odd that the lowest HP/Torque truck is the quickest.

Now maybe some make's horses are Clydesdale's and some are Shetland's 😉 :B...but I don't think this is necessarily the case.

But on the other hand, all other things (gearing, weight, etc.) being more or less relatively equal...why doe the truck with the least power...test in this test...the quickest ?


2015 Heavy duty truck comparison

[jus2shy]

Well, here's my take. I personally feel that all mass-scale auto manufacturers (producing more than 20,000 units a year by my ruler) ought to rate their engines using the same procedure. GM has it right with getting their engine certified and on the SAE list of certified engine output. I wish Ford and RAM would do the same (can't remember who, but someone on here pointed that out).

As for dead pedal. I have it. It mainly shows up when one lets off the throttle completely and then after a quarter second, mashes the pedal to the floor. There is an appreciable lag. However, if one drive where they typically roll on the throttle (versus mashing), it doesn't really show up. It's the same type of dead pedal I had in my F-150 prior, so no big deal to me. I adapted. It's a sad fact that the aftermarket can successfully sell a "Throttle Sensitivity Booster" for all makes for HD diesel trucks and beyond, so it isn't just a RAM issue. It's across the board.

As for the call for GCVWR performance, that's why J2807 was introduced (as Shiner noted earlier). It's a minimum performance. Ford meets it with their F-450, and Mike Levine has commented that the next generation Super Duty will be meeting all performance specs in the J2807 test. I personally wonder where they fall short on with the current truck. But for what it's worth, I highly doubt it's a maintaining speed on a hill climb issue. It could be the stops and starts on 12% (or was it 16%?) grades. 5 stops and starts within 5 minutes or something like that with GCVWR I think that'd be exceptionally rough. Maybe Frame permanent deflection testing? Just so much to wonder about. But the next gen (2018) will meet all the specs.

[ShinerBock]

I will chime in about the "dead pedal". There was some "dead pedal" when I first got my truck which was due to the Drive By Wire(DBW) system. To be honest I feel the same "dead pedal" in my brothers 2012 F350 SD which is also due to his DBW system. After installing a BD Throttle Sensitivity Booster the "dead pedal" and slow boost response when away completely. In stock form the pedal is slow to respond. You can mash the pedal, but the ECM will still send a gradual signal to the engine causing a delay in turbo spool as well. With the BD TSB on 50%, the truck respond to pedal inputs much quicker and is more how you would want your pedal to respond. With the BD TSB on 100%, the truck runs like a scalded cat and you will have a hard time with traction on take offs with slight throttle inputs and gets a lot worse with a tune. I had my truck in this setting for a while with my tune and I had to take it off because I started to notice chunks of tire missing from my rear tires one. It is not that I was trying to burn out at every take off, it was just that the pedal was so sensitive that slight inputs would brake the tires looks.


As far as the 68RFE gear hunting thing I have no idea what Fish is talking about. Mine has never went back and forth hunting for gears even before any mods. I just recently put a module to increase the line pressure in the trans. Not that it needed it, but as added protection since I was adding more power.

Although all this talk reminds me of the moron that wanted to race the other day when I had the gooseneck trailer attached with about 6k worth of tractor on it. I was stopped at the light coming out of Floresville heading back to San Antone. Another guy in a diesel pulled next to me in a bumper pull RV that was probably about 10k total. The light turn green and he just floored it make all sorts of noise. I was just taking off regularly and he was not gaining that much on me. I guess he thought I was racing him (even though I wasn't) because he just kept on flooring it and had to be doing 80 by the time he let off. I was still just 5 truck lengths behind him and I was taking off normally at part throttle. The rest of the way home my wife, my father-in-law, and my mother-in-law just could not stop laughing from how much a moron we thought that guy was. I bet he was thinking to himself that he was real cool when in fact everyone else was thinking he was an idiot.

[FishOnOne]

Cummins12V98 wrote:

Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:

I can tell from street experience loaded and unloaded that ever time a LAM owner tried to out run me, my Ford spanked them really bad. Everyone I've talked to who have driven both trucks including myself will say the Ford feels stronger than the ram.

The only one LAM is you and Ford. Spin this Troy " On the flipside, most of Dearborn’s pickups are compliant with this rating, though not all. Levine said, “Since 2013 all new Ford vehicles are rated according to J2807.” This includes the 2015 F-150 as well as its monstrous F-450. However, the blue oval’s F-250 and F-350 trucks are not currently compliant, something that will be rectified in the near future." LMAO every Ram truck is compliant and I believe all of the GM trucks are now also.

Don

He tends to omit certain things.

Interesting comment on the 68RFE dead pedal. NEVER had it with my 11 HO Dually or with current 15 with Aisin trans.

Only dead pedal comments have all been associated with the Aisin I have heard of.

The cummins is not a high Erving engine and does NOT seem fast.

Ask MeAgain if he thought we were doing 93 at the end of the freeway on ramp. I sure did not think so until I looked at the speedo. The Cummins is a sleeper it just hooks and pulls.

Perhaps some of the '13+ ram owners will chime in and correct you as usual.

Also both you and don was so butt hurt that the auto media compared a ram 3500 to a F450 and was calling fowl when I was saying forget the badging it's all relative. Now your calling your 3500 a 4500 LOL.

As for Meagain any newer diesel truck than his will give the same sense of cruising at lower speed than actual speed.