Ram 6.4L Hemi vs Chevy 6.0L vs Ford 6.2L (gassers)

[ib516]

Pickuptruck.com did a "work truck" comparison between the 3 trucks listed in the topic. All reg cab 3/4 tons.

Here's a summary:



The Ford had a 3.73 and the Ram and Chevy were 4.10 equipped.

Full article here:
CLICKY

[blt2ski]

I'd like to see the current rendition of the 4.3 V6 in a 2500. With 300 ponies/lb ft of torque, the6 sp auto trans, and 4.10 gears, one could net over 20 mpg in the correct conditions empty, along with still have the power, gearing etc to motivate upwards of a 10K trailer. NO, it will not go as fast as a current generation 400-450hp 900-1000lb ft of torque TD. It would work fine for me. It would sure as Hellsgate be better than the 81 with a 105hp 292 I6 I with a muncie 4 sp I had! I pulled upwards of 6000lbs with that rig. And had a gcwr of 8500, gvwr was 8600.....splain that one to me!

The other I noticed about the latest bunch....they weigh a TON! They are upwards of 1000-1500 lbs more than my 2000 C2500 WT rwd reg cab that I drive. My truck weighs all of 4800 lbs! My 96 SW K3500 TD crew cab was 6600 lbs......So just because the current bunch has a higher gvwr.....the blinken TARE WT takes ANY additional payload away! So a 9900 gvwr 2500 is really no better than my 8600 gvwr 2500. Both have about 3800 lbs of payload.

MY 02, not that some will agree......

marty

[kw_00]

That's what I like about the GM engine, it just works and does the job easily. I have always said GM really knows how to build small blocks. Well and of course some big blocks to... Let's not forget the recent 8.1... Anyway I figure I will get a lot more miles of this current truck I have. I believe the HD 6.0 will go with direct injection soon and some other performance enhancements...

[Kampfirekid]

Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote:
That will all change with the next Ram. They have decided to play the 3/4 ton under a 1/2 badge game also. The new 1500 will get six lug axles like the others along with a bump in the HP/TQ numbers for the baby diesel and other changes to bring it up to Ford's payload rating.

Honestly if I wanted a 3/4 ton truck i would buy a real 2500 not a want-to-be truck. But that is what the sheep want so FCA/Ram is finally bowing down. Whatever sells trucks I guess.

Don

I hear you, Don. I for one, have been burned on 1/2 ton payloads one too many times. I am currently ready to dump my 2016 F150 after the DW has been pressing to get another TT. I'll likely never go back to a 1/2 even though I love the smooth ride and ease of parking. I like GM's recent choice to stop with the power wars in their 2500 series and just work on delivering what their consumers want... a better truck with dependability. I'm hoping that some new technology comes soon that provides a good gas mill in a heavy duty that provides good fuel economy. I'm sick of the "don't mix fuel economy with heavy duty truck" syndrome. I use mine as a daily driver for about 40k miles a year. I can't swing two vehicles, it makes no sense. Maybe the truck market will level the playing fields soon, and provide some real practical trucks instead of glorified grocery getters.

[Perrysburg_Dodg]

That will all change with the next Ram. They have decided to play the 3/4 ton under a 1/2 badge game also. The new 1500 will get six lug axles like the others along with a bump in the HP/TQ numbers for the baby diesel and other changes to bring it up to Ford's payload rating.

Honestly if I wanted a 3/4 ton truck i would buy a real 2500 not a want-to-be truck. But that is what the sheep want so FCA/Ram is finally bowing down. Whatever sells trucks I guess.

Don

[Kampfirekid]

Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote:
I don't know blt2ski, Dad's 1973 C30 454 auto towed our fiver from NW Ohio to S.Cal without any issues what so ever. That thing was fast for a big ole crew cab pickup.

As for Alex yep had Ford sent a truck with the 4.30 gears they would have been very close to the Ram. But they would Not and I repeat NOT been the MPG champs. That seems to be Ford's number one thing, being the MPG King. When they get their little 3.0 diesel on line in the f-150 then they will recapture the crown in the half ton market.

Don

I think ford will do more than recapture the "mileage" crown. Fiat doesn't get that a diesel in a half ton is useless with the pittance payload numbers they provide. I think ford will combine the economy with the payload to make it worth while.

[transamz9]

Hannibal wrote:

transamz9 wrote:

Hannibal wrote:
My 2010 lethargic 5.4L F250 spanks the creep out of all five HD Rams I've owned in overall owner satisfaction. :B

As it should beings it is at least 5 years newer than the oldest Ram you had/have. Why don't you meet me some where and you can compare it to my 2005 Cummins?

I bought all my Rams new. Within three years I was anxious to get a new truck for some reason or another. I had a 2005 2500HD. It was a nice truck except for the dreaded driveline vibe, ball joints, a/c evaporator and a rebuilt AAM rear end. It was a duplicate of the 2003 Cummins powered 2500HD before it which also needed an a/c evaporator and AAM rebuild in less than 100k. The F250 has needed an O2 sensor and a rear brake caliper. What are you wanting to compare?

Well since this thread was about comparing different trucks doing what they do then I guess we could do the same test's as they did in the video. Race them loaded and unloaded. Fuel milege. Dyno them. You know, the stuff that matters. LOL

BTW, my 2005 Ram has only "needed" maintenance. Up until 75,000 miles the truck had not been touched other than maintenance. I replaced the factory tires at this point and went with one size bigger so at this time I put a 2.5" lift under the front. While I was in it that deep I went on and put in new ball joints and front axle u-joints. Most people are "if it ain't broke don't fix it" kind of people and I'm one of those "while you're in there go ahead and replace it" kind of people. Other than this work and me installing a 4-link air ride under the rear the truck has had nothing done to it. Does it have recalls on it? Yep, and still does. Until they agree to send me the air bag and other recall parts it will continue to have them.

[The_real_wild1]

Grit dog wrote:
They're all pretty impressive for small blocks considering what a gasser would do even as decent as only 10-15 years ago. GM is definitely long in the tooth but a venerable engine.
No complaints with the 2 6.2 F250s I've had. Never drove a Ram gasser since 2001 model.

What would propel the HD gasser market is getting a gasser with some real snort.
Between FoMoCo slapping a turbo or 2 on every engine they make and FCA pushing out a bevy of 400-700hp gassers in cars, one would think one of these mfgs would throw down on a real hp giant and watch them fly off the dealer lots!
Enough skepticism about newer diesels and enough weekend warriors pulling ever bigger trailers to have a decent niche I think.
Talking a mild blown 6.4 putting out 500hp or a 5.0 or 6.2 Eco BOOST.
Everything else with these trucks is built to handle the power....Who will be the first?

I would have loved to put a supercharger on my one ton 6.4 hemi. But no one builds the kit so you have to piece everything together and do some tuning. But once done that engine would scream!!

[Hannibal]

transamz9 wrote:

Hannibal wrote:
My 2010 lethargic 5.4L F250 spanks the creep out of all five HD Rams I've owned in overall owner satisfaction. :B

As it should beings it is at least 5 years newer than the oldest Ram you had/have. Why don't you meet me some where and you can compare it to my 2005 Cummins?

I bought all my Rams new. Within three years I was anxious to get a new truck for some reason or another. I had a 2005 2500HD. It was a nice truck except for the dreaded driveline vibe, ball joints, a/c evaporator and a rebuilt AAM rear end. It was a duplicate of the 2003 Cummins powered 2500HD before it which also needed an a/c evaporator and AAM rebuild in less than 100k. The F250 has needed an O2 sensor and a rear brake caliper. What are you wanting to compare?

[transamz9]

Hannibal wrote:
My 2010 lethargic 5.4L F250 spanks the creep out of all five HD Rams I've owned in overall owner satisfaction. :B

As it should beings it is at least 5 years newer than the oldest Ram you had/have. Why don't you meet me some where and you can compare it to my 2005 Cummins?

[Grit_dog]

They're all pretty impressive for small blocks considering what a gasser would do even as decent as only 10-15 years ago. GM is definitely long in the tooth but a venerable engine.
No complaints with the 2 6.2 F250s I've had. Never drove a Ram gasser since 2001 model.

What would propel the HD gasser market is getting a gasser with some real snort.
Between FoMoCo slapping a turbo or 2 on every engine they make and FCA pushing out a bevy of 400-700hp gassers in cars, one would think one of these mfgs would throw down on a real hp giant and watch them fly off the dealer lots!
Enough skepticism about newer diesels and enough weekend warriors pulling ever bigger trailers to have a decent niche I think.
Talking a mild blown 6.4 putting out 500hp or a 5.0 or 6.2 Eco BOOST.
Everything else with these trucks is built to handle the power....Who will be the first?

[mtofell1]

alexleblanc wrote:

Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote:
I don't know blt2ski, Dad's 1973 C30 454 auto towed our fiver from NW Ohio to S.Cal without any issues what so ever. That thing was fast for a big ole crew cab pickup.

As for Alex yep had Ford sent a truck with the 4.30 gears they would have been very close to the Ram. But they would Not and I repeat NOT been the MPG champs. That seems to be Ford's number one thing, being the MPG King. When they get their little 3.0 diesel on line in the f-150 then they will recapture the crown in the half ton market.

Don

Yup, 4.30 gears would have netted about 1-1.5 less mpg than it got, but it would have been right in line capacity and mpg wise with the others. Like I said before, in the end they are all matched quite well when equipped similarly.

Some guys on the Ram forum I frequent have actually seen an increase in MPGs when jumping to 4.56 gears from the factory 3.73s. I agree with just flat out highway driving you'd see a drop in MPGs with the new gears. But the city driving can be helped a bit with the new gearing.

[brulaz]

The Al vs Steel body sure didn't meet my expectations.

- The RAM was lighter unloaded than the Al bodied F250? How is that?
- The GM steel bed was weaker in one way than the F250 Al bed?

Just goes to show that there's a lot more to engineering these trucks than one single component, like the metal used in the body.

[alexleblanc]

Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote:
I don't know blt2ski, Dad's 1973 C30 454 auto towed our fiver from NW Ohio to S.Cal without any issues what so ever. That thing was fast for a big ole crew cab pickup.

As for Alex yep had Ford sent a truck with the 4.30 gears they would have been very close to the Ram. But they would Not and I repeat NOT been the MPG champs. That seems to be Ford's number one thing, being the MPG King. When they get their little 3.0 diesel on line in the f-150 then they will recapture the crown in the half ton market.

Don

Yup, 4.30 gears would have netted about 1-1.5 less mpg than it got, but it would have been right in line capacity and mpg wise with the others. Like I said before, in the end they are all matched quite well when equipped similarly.

[Hannibal]

My 2010 lethargic 5.4L F250 spanks the creep out of all five HD Rams I've owned in overall owner satisfaction. :B