Ram Eco-Diesel vs F150 2.7 TT - Davis Dam

[Hybridhunter]

You just know it's not gonna be close!

So which is better? Horsepower or torque lol.
(The answer is both, apparently.)

[jerem0621]

Man, you guys just have to out there pointing out that the EcoDiesel has as much if not more HP than the CTD and the 7.3 PSD did back in their day, the only issue is that the older trucks pulled twice as much weight.

Remember, people post on here all the time looking for these old 5.9 and 7.3 Diesels and are willing to pay a premium for them. I suppose they are fine with the acceleration into traffic.

I have no doubt the EcoDiesel will be a great match for a 7500 ish lb travel trailer. It should haul it great.

I bet the EcoDiesel will turn out great...now let's just hope the tuners can keep their hands off of it...yeah right. Lol

I bet you in 6 mo or so someone is going to post on here about how their EcoDiesel was gutless until they tuned it and now it's putting out 365 hp and 575 lb ft of tq or something like that...then a few months later we will hear about some tuning related failure and then how terrible Ram is for denying warranty work...after all they will have "restored the factory tune". Lol

Why will I buy my EcoDiesel new?.... Because I will get one before the tuner boy gets it!! Lol

Thanks!

Jeremiah

[wilber1]

Bionic Man wrote:

Hybridhunter wrote:

Tystevens wrote:

mcsurveyor wrote:
To me, the biggest benefit I see with the Eco-Diesel is the towing fuel economy, which from all accounts I've heard, is tremendous. ***

But getting 15+ mpg while towing 7,000 lbs is something that I could get on board with.

I'm skeptical of 15+ mpg towing a travel trailer in the real world. Other, lower profile trailers, sure (I can get 15 mpg in my Ecoboost towing a cargo trailer that sits a tad lower than the top of my F150, for example), but a high profile brick? The physics just don't make sense to me. But if we start seeing consistent reports of that kind of fuel economy from the ED, well, that would be a huge breakthrough. I'd give up 40 seconds up the hill to gain 5-6 mpg!

I've read what is likely every report on the ED towing, and it does get better mileage than any other half ton. The more honest reports, from non-fanboys, have shown that towing comparable trailers, it is likely they will be in the low teens, where an efficient gasser might be around 10mpg. So it appears a 25% fuel economy advantage is the real world number. Hard to compare exactly, as the person who is content with 240hp in a 6000# vehicle is generally not in a big hurry.
Good luck passing and merging with 240hp, whether you care about races up hills of whatever. And no amount of excuse making makes slow passing, sometimes while going uphill, or into a wind a good thing.

I do think the ED is the ultimate angler-mobile. A great alternative for efficient boat towing.

Just curious why someone who is obviously strongly opposed to the EcoDiesel (or anything Dodge/Ram for that matter) would read "every report on the ED towing"? And what how do you determine who is a "fanboy" and who isn't?

I did just fine towing 10000 pounds with my 99 CTD. What did that have, 235 HP (and less gears). Guess I am lucky to be alive.

Me to with my 01towing my 10K Titanium. I guess ten years of towing, including getting from the west coast to Newfoundland and back was just dumb luck.

[Bionic_Man]

Hybridhunter wrote:

Tystevens wrote:

mcsurveyor wrote:
To me, the biggest benefit I see with the Eco-Diesel is the towing fuel economy, which from all accounts I've heard, is tremendous. ***

But getting 15+ mpg while towing 7,000 lbs is something that I could get on board with.

I'm skeptical of 15+ mpg towing a travel trailer in the real world. Other, lower profile trailers, sure (I can get 15 mpg in my Ecoboost towing a cargo trailer that sits a tad lower than the top of my F150, for example), but a high profile brick? The physics just don't make sense to me. But if we start seeing consistent reports of that kind of fuel economy from the ED, well, that would be a huge breakthrough. I'd give up 40 seconds up the hill to gain 5-6 mpg!

I've read what is likely every report on the ED towing, and it does get better mileage than any other half ton. The more honest reports, from non-fanboys, have shown that towing comparable trailers, it is likely they will be in the low teens, where an efficient gasser might be around 10mpg. So it appears a 25% fuel economy advantage is the real world number. Hard to compare exactly, as the person who is content with 240hp in a 6000# vehicle is generally not in a big hurry.
Good luck passing and merging with 240hp, whether you care about races up hills of whatever. And no amount of excuse making makes slow passing, sometimes while going uphill, or into a wind a good thing.

I do think the ED is the ultimate angler-mobile. A great alternative for efficient boat towing.

Just curious why someone who is obviously strongly opposed to the EcoDiesel (or anything Dodge/Ram for that matter) would read "every report on the ED towing"? And what how do you determine who is a "fanboy" and who isn't?

I did just fine towing 10000 pounds with my 99 CTD. What did that have, 235 HP (and less gears). Guess I am lucky to be alive.

[RCMAN46]

brulaz wrote:

RCMAN46 wrote:
"or the smaller cummins "

Where does this come from?

The Eco-Diesel is not related to the Cummins in any way except Ram has both engines in their lineup.

"The 3.0-liter EcoDiesel V-6 comes to these shores courtesy of VM Motori, a longtime Italian marine-diesel-engine builder and former affiliate of Fiat. Ownership is now, interestingly enough, split 50/50 between Chrysler/Fiat and General Motors. Yes, GM."

It is possible we may see the same Eco-Diesel in a GM vehicle.

Nah, since then GM sold out its share in VM Motori to Fiat.

Correct:

The article I quoted was prior to October 2013.
But it is still true the Eco-Diesel has no relation to the Cummins.

[wilber1]

For some, it's all about peak hp and how fast you can get up a hill at WOT. Makes you wonder why anyone would buy a Cummins HO, Powerstroke or Dmax, when the 6.4 Hemi has them all beat, peak HP wise.

[jody_h]

Hybridhunter wrote:

Tystevens wrote:

mcsurveyor wrote:
To me, the biggest benefit I see with the Eco-Diesel is the towing fuel economy, which from all accounts I've heard, is tremendous. ***

But getting 15+ mpg while towing 7,000 lbs is something that I could get on board with.

I'm skeptical of 15+ mpg towing a travel trailer in the real world. Other, lower profile trailers, sure (I can get 15 mpg in my Ecoboost towing a cargo trailer that sits a tad lower than the top of my F150, for example), but a high profile brick? The physics just don't make sense to me. But if we start seeing consistent reports of that kind of fuel economy from the ED, well, that would be a huge breakthrough. I'd give up 40 seconds up the hill to gain 5-6 mpg!

Good luck passing and merging with 240hp, whether you care about races up hills of whatever. And no amount of excuse making makes slow passing, sometimes while going uphill, or into a wind a good thing.

I do think the ED is the ultimate angler-mobile. A great alternative for efficient boat towing.

Never had any problem merging or passing with less HP pulling a GN with 17000# with a 86 Ford 350. Boy some of you here think you just have to have all the HP in the world to get the job done. When in fact not more then 20 Years ago it was getting done with less.

[Hybridhunter]

3



Pricing for the 2015 Ford F-150 lineup was confirmed today by a Ford spokesman. The F-150 range has been simplified from 10 models to just five, with the base XL starting at $26,615 including destination.


More on Motortrend.com:

2014 Ford F-150 Tremor FX2, FX4 First Test

2015 Ford F 150 Front View With the STX trim eliminated, the next level up is the XLT, which starts at $31,925. Both XL and XLT models come standard with the new 3.5-liter V-6, which makes 283 hp and 255 lb-ft of torque. Both models increase by $395. The 2.7-liter EcBoost V-6, which makes 325 hp and 375 lb-ft, is available for the XL and XLT for $495. The 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 can be had for $1995 over the base V-6. The 2015 F-150 Lariat starts at $39,730, increasing by $895, and comes standard with the 2.7-liter EcoBoost.


Read more: http://wot.motortrend.com/1407_2015_ford_f_150_starts_at_26615_platinum_model_priced_from_52155.html#ixzz39Yqu8Bul

So much for a big price increase! 2.7 is a $500 option....

[Hybridhunter]

Tystevens wrote:

mcsurveyor wrote:
To me, the biggest benefit I see with the Eco-Diesel is the towing fuel economy, which from all accounts I've heard, is tremendous. ***

But getting 15+ mpg while towing 7,000 lbs is something that I could get on board with.

I'm skeptical of 15+ mpg towing a travel trailer in the real world. Other, lower profile trailers, sure (I can get 15 mpg in my Ecoboost towing a cargo trailer that sits a tad lower than the top of my F150, for example), but a high profile brick? The physics just don't make sense to me. But if we start seeing consistent reports of that kind of fuel economy from the ED, well, that would be a huge breakthrough. I'd give up 40 seconds up the hill to gain 5-6 mpg!

I've read what is likely every report on the ED towing, and it does get better mileage than any other half ton. The more honest reports, from non-fanboys, have shown that towing comparable trailers, it is likely they will be in the low teens, where an efficient gasser might be around 10mpg. So it appears a 25% fuel economy advantage is the real world number. Hard to compare exactly, as the person who is content with 240hp in a 6000# vehicle is generally not in a big hurry.
Good luck passing and merging with 240hp, whether you care about races up hills of whatever. And no amount of excuse making makes slow passing, sometimes while going uphill, or into a wind a good thing.

I do think the ED is the ultimate angler-mobile. A great alternative for efficient boat towing.

[Hybridhunter]

Fast Mopar wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:

Sincerely,
The No Spin Zone

This place is quickly becoming BS central.

Yep. Too many Dodge shills.

[Hybridhunter]

Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote:


Not sure who was doing that, the Ford has more HP then the Ram so it had better out run the ram towing and it did but only by 46 seconds. So if running up the hill faster then the other guy is what you want get the Eco-Boost. If towing and make 14-19 MPG doing it is more important then get the Eco-Diesel. But bottom line get what you want because YOU researched the trucks reading what the owners say about it NOT what the manufactures say. BTW I'll bet you lunch that the Ram didn't have the 3:92 gear ratio in it.

Don

Actually it did. But it's funny how you change the game whenever it favors Dodge. The fact is, if the ED can do it, the 2.7TT can do it with more in reserve, for cheaper.
And the market will determine which is cheaper and sells, so if the Dodge is cheaper, and sells fewer, which is better? Facts say the ED is just not worth it for tangible reasons. The argument is favor is all about philosophy, not dollars and sense. Or cents.

Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote:
Just to clear up this I called the dealer and was told the oil filter cost $60.00 and the oil (Pennzoil 5w30) cost $9.20 X 11 = $101.20 for a total of $161.20. The Ford dealerships as doing full Syn oil changes for $49.95. So win for Ford.

Don

Does this cancel out the 2 pages of BS about maintenance costs? Geez.

[wilber1]

Fiat might sell 3.0 diesels to GM but I think it more likely they will find their way into 300's and Chargers first.

[brulaz]

mich800 wrote:

brulaz wrote:

RCMAN46 wrote:
"or the smaller cummins "

Where does this come from?

The Eco-Diesel is not related to the Cummins in any way except Ram has both engines in their lineup.

"The 3.0-liter EcoDiesel V-6 comes to these shores courtesy of VM Motori, a longtime Italian marine-diesel-engine builder and former affiliate of Fiat. Ownership is now, interestingly enough, split 50/50 between Chrysler/Fiat and General Motors. Yes, GM."

It is possible we may see the same Eco-Diesel in a GM vehicle.

Nah, since then GM sold out its share in VM Motori to Fiat.

Ford owns Cummins and leases the rights to Ram. GM owns VM and leases the rights to Ram. I guess that is why the R&D department is so empty at Chrysler. 🙂

Now how long until someone pulls up the Cummins prospectus just to be the first to prove this wrong.

OK, you're joking, but on the internet any statement can take on a certain "truthiness".:) So here's the Fiat-GM link: http://www.autonews.com/article/20131028/OEM10/131029887/fiat-buys-remainder-of-diesel-maker-vm-moto...

[mich800]

brulaz wrote:

RCMAN46 wrote:
"or the smaller cummins "

Where does this come from?

The Eco-Diesel is not related to the Cummins in any way except Ram has both engines in their lineup.

"The 3.0-liter EcoDiesel V-6 comes to these shores courtesy of VM Motori, a longtime Italian marine-diesel-engine builder and former affiliate of Fiat. Ownership is now, interestingly enough, split 50/50 between Chrysler/Fiat and General Motors. Yes, GM."

It is possible we may see the same Eco-Diesel in a GM vehicle.

Nah, since then GM sold out its share in VM Motori to Fiat.

Ford owns Cummins and leases the rights to Ram. GM owns VM and leases the rights to Ram. I guess that is why the R&D department is so empty at Chrysler. 🙂

Now how long until someone pulls up the Cummins prospectus just to be the first to prove this wrong.

[brulaz]

RCMAN46 wrote:
"or the smaller cummins "

Where does this come from?

The Eco-Diesel is not related to the Cummins in any way except Ram has both engines in their lineup.

"The 3.0-liter EcoDiesel V-6 comes to these shores courtesy of VM Motori, a longtime Italian marine-diesel-engine builder and former affiliate of Fiat. Ownership is now, interestingly enough, split 50/50 between Chrysler/Fiat and General Motors. Yes, GM."

It is possible we may see the same Eco-Diesel in a GM vehicle.

Nah, since then GM sold out its share in VM Motori to Fiat.

[Tystevens]

mcsurveyor wrote:
To me, the biggest benefit I see with the Eco-Diesel is the towing fuel economy, which from all accounts I've heard, is tremendous. ***

But getting 15+ mpg while towing 7,000 lbs is something that I could get on board with.

I'm skeptical of 15+ mpg towing a travel trailer in the real world. Other, lower profile trailers, sure (I can get 15 mpg in my Ecoboost towing a cargo trailer that sits a tad lower than the top of my F150, for example), but a high profile brick? The physics just don't make sense to me. But if we start seeing consistent reports of that kind of fuel economy from the ED, well, that would be a huge breakthrough. I'd give up 40 seconds up the hill to gain 5-6 mpg!