Ram 2500 - 2014 vs 2015 Differences

[Mumphry]

I am considering a 2014 Ram 2500 still on the lot. Anyone know the differences in the:
1) chassis
2) axle
3) 6.4 engine.

It looks like the 14' has the five link rear end and the Multi Displacement System (cylinder deactivation) just like the 2015's.

[TurnThePage]

4X4Dodger wrote:

Grit dog wrote:

bhall wrote:

RoyJ wrote:


Not sure about GM, but have you checked the door sticker of different models on the lot?

That is how I purchased my 2015 Silverado 2500. My wife hates red and don't you know it, the red one had the highest payload rating at 2831 lbs of the 3 other 2500s on the lot that night.

I often wonder what the fascination or paranoia over payload numbers is on here. Not talking major differences like 1/2 to 3/4 ton, but the scrutiny over minor payload differences is mind boggling.
Same frame, axles, brakes, etc. If the @ss end is a little too soft, there are about 20 different ways to shore it up. (Note I didn't say increase capacity to keep from upsetting the weight police....lol)
I've owned or been assigned at least 25 different pickups in the last 20 years and never once looked at the payload capacity other than in general terms. If the truck needed help with the rear suspension, coupe, hundred bucks of add a leaf, overloads, Timbrens or bags took care of the issue. Have overloaded many trucks for many miles and never broke an axle or spring.
Y'all should find more enjoyable ways to spend your time than worrying about mfg rated payloads!
Buy your favorite color and brand and call it good.

I agree with you for the most part.

There is a Navel Gazing obsession here with these payload/towing numbers that borders on the absurd and makes one want to run around and set ones hair on fire.

All it does is serve to confuse a very simple issue and scare a lot of buyers into thinking they need to buy the biggest most expensive and for the Auto makers, THE MOST PROFITABLE vehicles they manufacture.

I wish more people would raise their voices to bring a semblance of common sense to this discussion. Unfortunately they get shouted down with streams of numbers, so called facts and very dubious ideas about engineering. To say nothing of the curb-side amateur Lawyers claiming Tort Hell is in store for anyone that dares to ignore their sage advice...How did this simple issue ever devolve to this?

Very well said!

[4X4Dodger]

Mumphry wrote:
I am considering a 2014 Ram 2500 still on the lot. Anyone know the differences in the:
1) chassis
2) axle
3) 6.4 engine.

It looks like the 14' has the five link rear end and the Multi Displacement System (cylinder deactivation) just like the 2015's.

Pick up the 2015 truck brochure in the dealership and compare them. You will find they are virtually identical.

[4X4Dodger]

Grit dog wrote:

bhall wrote:

RoyJ wrote:


Not sure about GM, but have you checked the door sticker of different models on the lot?

That is how I purchased my 2015 Silverado 2500. My wife hates red and don't you know it, the red one had the highest payload rating at 2831 lbs of the 3 other 2500s on the lot that night.

I often wonder what the fascination or paranoia over payload numbers is on here. Not talking major differences like 1/2 to 3/4 ton, but the scrutiny over minor payload differences is mind boggling.
Same frame, axles, brakes, etc. If the @ss end is a little too soft, there are about 20 different ways to shore it up. (Note I didn't say increase capacity to keep from upsetting the weight police....lol)
I've owned or been assigned at least 25 different pickups in the last 20 years and never once looked at the payload capacity other than in general terms. If the truck needed help with the rear suspension, coupe, hundred bucks of add a leaf, overloads, Timbrens or bags took care of the issue. Have overloaded many trucks for many miles and never broke an axle or spring.
Y'all should find more enjoyable ways to spend your time than worrying about mfg rated payloads!
Buy your favorite color and brand and call it good.

I agree with you for the most part.

There is a Navel Gazing obsession here with these payload/towing numbers that borders on the absurd and makes one want to run around and set ones hair on fire.

All it does is serve to confuse a very simple issue and scare a lot of buyers into thinking they need to buy the biggest most expensive and for the Auto makers, THE MOST PROFITABLE vehicles they manufacture.

I wish more people would raise their voices to bring a semblance of common sense to this discussion. Unfortunately they get shouted down with streams of numbers, so called facts and very dubious ideas about engineering. To say nothing of the curb-side amateur Lawyers claiming Tort Hell is in store for anyone that dares to ignore their sage advice...How did this simple issue ever devolve to this?

[brulaz]

Grit dog wrote:

...
I often wonder what the fascination or paranoia over payload numbers is on here. Not talking major differences like 1/2 to 3/4 ton, but the scrutiny over minor payload differences is mind boggling.
Same frame, axles, brakes, etc. If the @ss end is a little too soft, there are about 20 different ways to shore it up. (Note I didn't say increase capacity to keep from upsetting the weight police....lol)
I've owned or been assigned at least 25 different pickups in the last 20 years and never once looked at the payload capacity other than in general terms. If the truck needed help with the rear suspension, coupe, hundred bucks of add a leaf, overloads, Timbrens or bags took care of the issue. Have overloaded many trucks for many miles and never broke an axle or spring.
...

You sound like the guy who sold my younger self a camper and said "you just need an extra leaf on that truck".

When one of the rear bearings busted, and the rear axle/wheel pulled right out of the housing, I was very happy to be travelling at low speeds in town.

[kaydeejay]

Grit dog wrote:
I often wonder what the fascination or paranoia over payload numbers is on here. Not talking major differences like 1/2 to 3/4 ton, but the scrutiny over minor payload differences is mind boggling.

You have obviously never been involved in any kind of litigation or warranty administration.
Let's hope you are never in an accident while your truck is over GVWR. A compensation lawyer will run circles around you and don't expect the vehicle Manufacturer to support you either.
Secondly, I have seen situations where powertrain/suspension/brake warranty has been denied for a truck that is overloaded. Kinda hard to hide it when you are towed in from the side of the road with a blown tranny and the big fiver on the back! Don't expect the dealer to cover for you - they are expected to evaluate why the vehicle failed. Being over GVWR is all that is needed to void the warranty on related components - period!
With any luck you will never find out how powerful that payload number is! Call it paranoia if you want, I prefer to see it as using common sense and acting responsibly.

To BHall - by taking note of those payload numbers you made a good decision.

[bhall]

Grit dog wrote:

bhall wrote:

RoyJ wrote:


Not sure about GM, but have you checked the door sticker of different models on the lot?

That is how I purchased my 2015 Silverado 2500. My wife hates red and don't you know it, the red one had the highest payload rating at 2831 lbs of the 3 other 2500s on the lot that night.

I often wonder what the fascination or paranoia over payload numbers is on here. Not talking major differences like 1/2 to 3/4 ton, but the scrutiny over minor payload differences is mind boggling.
Same frame, axles, brakes, etc. If the @ss end is a little too soft, there are about 20 different ways to shore it up. (Note I didn't say increase capacity to keep from upsetting the weight police....lol)
I've owned or been assigned at least 25 different pickups in the last 20 years and never once looked at the payload capacity other than in general terms. If the truck needed help with the rear suspension, coupe, hundred bucks of add a leaf, overloads, Timbrens or bags took care of the issue. Have overloaded many trucks for many miles and never broke an axle or spring.
Y'all should find more enjoyable ways to spend your time than worrying about mfg rated payloads!
Buy your favorite color and brand and call it good.

Not sure if you're trying to belittle my decision process as wasting time, but it only took 5 minutes on the lot that night to walk to 3 different trucks and find out there were 190 lbs difference between the 3. I had already ruled out Ford and Ram 250/2500 as I saw their payloads topped out at 2600 that were on the lots. I really hate buying things more than once nor do I have the time and want to spend the extra money to "shore up" the truck because I couldn't take 5 minutes to check the labels. I'd like to spend the "shore up" time and money on the muscle car or street rod.
I wish I had the good luck you purport to have in your endeavors, but I had a shock blow out on a 1/2 cubic yard of dried mulch among other past issues with other trucks.

[ib516]

kaydeejay wrote:

ib516 wrote:
......................
.
It's not the actual payload (on the label) they were fudging, it was the max payload advertised numbers.

At least we agree on that point!
I would venture to suggest that the specific truck rating (on the Tire label) is more important than a theoretical MAXIMUM rating using a stripped truck to create the highest possible number for a given series of vehicles.

Yep.

[kaydeejay]

ib516 wrote:
......................
.
It's not the actual payload (on the label) they were fudging, it was the max payload advertised numbers.

At least we agree on that point!
I would venture to suggest that the specific truck rating (on the Tire label) is more important than a theoretical MAXIMUM rating using a stripped truck to create the highest possible number for a given series of vehicles.
But please note, it was OPTIONAL equipment that was removed, but I doubt anyone would order a truck spec'd that way.
A bit like Staples not allowing employees to work more than 25 hours so the Co. does not pay for Obamacare - not illegal, but doesn't make it "right"

[Grit_dog]

bhall wrote:

RoyJ wrote:


Not sure about GM, but have you checked the door sticker of different models on the lot?

That is how I purchased my 2015 Silverado 2500. My wife hates red and don't you know it, the red one had the highest payload rating at 2831 lbs of the 3 other 2500s on the lot that night.

I often wonder what the fascination or paranoia over payload numbers is on here. Not talking major differences like 1/2 to 3/4 ton, but the scrutiny over minor payload differences is mind boggling.
Same frame, axles, brakes, etc. If the @ss end is a little too soft, there are about 20 different ways to shore it up. (Note I didn't say increase capacity to keep from upsetting the weight police....lol)
I've owned or been assigned at least 25 different pickups in the last 20 years and never once looked at the payload capacity other than in general terms. If the truck needed help with the rear suspension, coupe, hundred bucks of add a leaf, overloads, Timbrens or bags took care of the issue. Have overloaded many trucks for many miles and never broke an axle or spring.
Y'all should find more enjoyable ways to spend your time than worrying about mfg rated payloads!
Buy your favorite color and brand and call it good.

[bhall]

transamz9 wrote:

bhall wrote:

RoyJ wrote:


Not sure about GM, but have you checked the door sticker of different models on the lot?

That is how I purchased my 2015 Silverado 2500. My wife hates red and don't you know it, the red one had the highest payload rating at 2831 lbs of the 3 other 2500s on the lot that night.

Do you have a diesel or gas 2500?

Gas. Crew Cab. LT Trim

[transamz9]

bhall wrote:

RoyJ wrote:


Not sure about GM, but have you checked the door sticker of different models on the lot?

That is how I purchased my 2015 Silverado 2500. My wife hates red and don't you know it, the red one had the highest payload rating at 2831 lbs of the 3 other 2500s on the lot that night.

Do you have a diesel or gas 2500?

[ib516]

kaydeejay wrote:

ib516 wrote:
..............Unlike the competition, Ram rates their payload including radio, console, and bumpers.

What ARE you talking about?
The Tire and loading info label is required by law on every truck since 2006.
The "Occupant and cargo must not exceed" number is calculated for EACH truck AS BUILT and has to be accurate within 10#.
So it includes the radio, console and bumpers!
Now there has been some interesting marketing of MAXIMUM payload ratings which WERE values from a stripped (but theoretically orderable) configuration.
Bottom line - check the label on the truck for the REAL number, regardless of manufacturer.

I was talking about when Ford and GM were caught "fudging" their "max payload" numbers by quoting them for a truck without a:
- rear bumper
- spare tire
- center console
- jack and wheel wrench
- radio and speaker(s)
- and swapping in lighter aluminium wheels on trucks that come with steel wheels

"The American automaker has said that it also removes heavy items from its pickup trucks when it weighs them to help boost the trucks’ maximum payload ratings. The company adopted the practice this year to stay competitive when it launched its redesigned full-sized pickups. Ford started using the tactic about four years ago, showing that the maximum payload is larger than would be possible if it used the standard base curb weight of the truck.

Removing heavy items including the rear bumper and swapping out the heavier standard steel wheels for optional lighter alloy wheels, helps increase a truck’s maximum payload figure while keeping the same gross vehicle weight rating. GM spokesman Tom Wilkinson told Automotive News that the maximum payload claims on the 2015 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 and GMC Sierra 1500 are based on a minimum curb weight that deletes the rear bumper and spare tire. Ford said that the maximum payload claim on the weight of the base F-series is derived after various items are removed, not on the base curb weight of the F-series pickup.

Chrysler has reaffirmed that the Ram brand uses the base curb weight of its pickups to establish the maximum payload capacities and doesn’t use a modified curb weight like Ford and GM."

"Both automakers have acknowledged that they remove factory parts - including bumpers and spare tires, among other items - before calculating payload ratings on certain pickups. Without those components, curb weight is reduced, letting the companies tout higher payloads than are advisable with the actual unmodified trucks that buyers see in showrooms.
Payloads ratings are devised by determining the difference between an automobile's gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) and its unladen curb weight.
Ford told Automotive News that it began using the practice in the 2011 model year with its F-250, F-350 and F-450 Super Duty pickups, removing items like the spare tire, jack, radio and center console.

As AN notes, loading up an F-450 to its advertised payload capacity would cause the truck to exceed its GVWR by 61 pounds. But exceeding a vehicle's GVWR could lead Ford to void the warranty.
In order to maintain "apples-to-apples" comparisons, GM decided to follow Ford's example and started taking off components such as the rear bumper before calculating payload ratings for its 2015 2500HD and 3500HD pickups.
A number of dealers, including Mitchell Dale, president of McRee Ford in Dickinson, Texas, have voiced concern over the practice, which they feel could confuse consumers and erode buyer confidence.
"When we're starting to remove items from the vehicle, it would be my expectation that all manufacturers do their testing with production line vehicles similar to what a customer would drive," Dale said.
"We're so internally focused on having the bragging rights of whatever segment we're talking about that it appears that there are some questionable practices being done."
For their part, Toyota and Ram have stated that they use stock pickups fitted with all standard components in order to calculate payload ratings."


Read more: LINK

Then the fallout and backpedal by GM a few days later:

"Following last week's mild uproar after it was discovered that Ford and General Motors were removing some optional parts from their pickups to lower the curb weight and consequently increase the maximum payload, GM has come out and committed to a base curb weight for its upcoming Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon compact trucks (although it has yet to publish them) and its current Silverado and Sierra. The company will do the same for its heavy duty offerings, although those numbers have not been finalized yet.

"This will make our curb weight and payload specs more consistent with those of most other truck makers, making it easier for customers to compare vehicles," GM spokesman Tom Wilkinson told Autoblog in an emailed statement.

As GM notes – and as every manufacturer has noted since this story broke – customers still shouldn't take max payload ratings as gospel. Instead, they should refer to their truck's Tire and Load Label, like the one shown at the inset, which will offer detailed information on max payload, specific to their truck.

Automotive News, meanwhile, reports that Ford has not made any changes to the way it figures out max payload ratings, despite the GM announcement. The company was at the center of last week's news, when it was revealed that it removed items like the spare tire, jack, radio and even the center console, to determine the curb weight for the F-Series Super Duty."

LINK
.
.
.
.
It's not the actual payload (on the label) they were fudging, it was the max payload advertised numbers.

[kaydeejay]

RoyJ wrote:
Not sure about GM, but have you checked the door sticker of different models on the lot..................

Don't have to check the labels - I was responsible for all of the the variable data* labels on GM products until I retired. So I KNOW the legal requirement behind those Tire labels. If any Manufacturer is NOT calculating payload for EACH vehicle, then they are breaking the law.

* the ones with vehicle specific values - Certification, Tire loading, emission, price, to name but a few.

BTW, Ford "cheated" to come up with a Maximum payload rating for a product range. It would have been theoretically possible for a customer to order a truck with the configuration that resulted in that max number - not that most folks would want to. So was it really "cheating" or simply misleading?
It does not mean they were off the hook for calculating each specific vehicle's rating for the Tire label.

[bhall]

RoyJ wrote:


Not sure about GM, but have you checked the door sticker of different models on the lot?

That is how I purchased my 2015 Silverado 2500. My wife hates red and don't you know it, the red one had the highest payload rating at 2831 lbs of the 3 other 2500s on the lot that night.