Ram Goes to Stunning 900 lb-ft of torque

[Perrysburg_Dodg]

The 2016 Ram 3500 breaks the towing record previously held by the old Ram 3500 (at 30,000 pounds) by moving up to 31,210 pounds,more than two tons beyond its closest rival. To get there, Ram went from 12 to 16 hardened bolts on the rear axle ring gear (for all trucks with the 11.8-inch axle), and used stronger materials in the differential case.

LINK

[debraindi]

jmtandem wrote:
Amazing how Ram now has Ford and GM playing catch up. Ford will likely be next to go to 900 plus pounds of torque and then it starts all over again. It keeps the testers heading up to the Eisenhower tunnel busy towing heavy trailers and watching speeds and fuel mileage.

And Ram has come a long way since 1989 when the Cummins in the Dodge put out only 400 foot pounds and 160 horsepower. Today, many gas engines easily put out 400 foot pounds of torque.

Its funny to see the big 3 haggle over the standards. It seem Dodge is always steping out of line with there ratings. Its ok they got away with there new 3500 and the class 3 rating 4500. I will keep my 2013 LML ltz z71 with Allison 6 speed transmission any day . The last few year Dodge has really stepped up an produced some nice trucks.

[Turtle_n_Peeps]

FishOnOne wrote:

Turtle n Peeps wrote:

Ford wrote:
Ram quickly pointed out that the rating was for an F-450, which is in a different class than its 3500. But Ford shot back, saying that despite its name, the F-450 is technically a class 3 pickup truck, thanks to its gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 14,000 lbs., putting it in direct competition with the Ram 3500.

ROTFLMAO, well if it's "technically a class 3 pickup truck" then why does it have a class 4 badge on it??

I wonder if the people that buy a class 4 badged pickup know if they "really" know they are buying a class 3 pickup?

Ford marketing, they are second to NONE! :B

Perhaps the other marketing is to sell a class 4 with a class 3 badge. There's a reason RAM 3500 one upped the F450! It's to say there best in class once again.

My advice is don't get caught up with the badges! :W

Putting a 450 badge on a pickup that's really a 350 and then selling it as a 450........despicable.


Putting a 350 badge on a pickup that's really a 450 and then selling it as a 350........admirable.

[Cummins12V98]

FishOnOne wrote:

Turtle n Peeps wrote:

Ford wrote:
Ram quickly pointed out that the rating was for an F-450, which is in a different class than its 3500. But Ford shot back, saying that despite its name, the F-450 is technically a class 3 pickup truck, thanks to its gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 14,000 lbs., putting it in direct competition with the Ram 3500.

ROTFLMAO, well if it's "technically a class 3 pickup truck" then why does it have a class 4 badge on it??

I wonder if the people that buy a class 4 badged pickup know if they "really" know they are buying a class 3 pickup?

Ford marketing, they are second to NONE! :B

Perhaps the other marketing is to sell a class 4 with a class 3 badge. There's a reason RAM 3500 one upped the F450! It's to say there best in class once again.

My advice is don't get caught up with the badges! :W

I won't argue one bit my truck is in class 4 territory and the Ford when they finally decide to build a modern truck they will be in the same class 4 with a 3 label.

My truck loaded weight is 15K and I am well within front and rear axle ratings. The 14K is just a number for licensing these days.

[FishOnOne]

Turtle n Peeps wrote:

Ford wrote:
Ram quickly pointed out that the rating was for an F-450, which is in a different class than its 3500. But Ford shot back, saying that despite its name, the F-450 is technically a class 3 pickup truck, thanks to its gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 14,000 lbs., putting it in direct competition with the Ram 3500.

ROTFLMAO, well if it's "technically a class 3 pickup truck" then why does it have a class 4 badge on it??

I wonder if the people that buy a class 4 badged pickup know if they "really" know they are buying a class 3 pickup?

Ford marketing, they are second to NONE! :B

Perhaps the other marketing is to sell a class 4 with a class 3 badge. There's a reason RAM 3500 one upped the F450! It's to say there best in class once again.

My advice is don't get caught up with the badges! :W

[Turtle_n_Peeps]

Ford wrote:
Ram quickly pointed out that the rating was for an F-450, which is in a different class than its 3500. But Ford shot back, saying that despite its name, the F-450 is technically a class 3 pickup truck, thanks to its gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 14,000 lbs., putting it in direct competition with the Ram 3500.

ROTFLMAO, well if it's "technically a class 3 pickup truck" then why does it have a class 4 badge on it??

I wonder if the people that buy a class 4 badged pickup know if they "really" know they are buying a class 3 pickup?

Ford marketing, they are second to NONE! :B

[Bigfoot_affair]

Just another mine is bigger than yours... Clicky

[transamz9]

Turtle n Peeps wrote:
That's the same reasoning that some use with the 6.7 engine.

Why didn't Cummins and Ram just stay with the 5.9 engine when all they had to do is put a box on the fuel system and jack the power up to 385 HP? After all, lots of people are putting out over 400 streetable HP out of their 5.9's so why not just stick with the proven engine?


Two of the big reasons are reliability and emissions. When you tack things like DPF's and things like that onto the engine it takes HP away from the wheels. To make that up they had to go to a bigger engine. When you put more emissions on engines you have to bring the power up. When you bring the power up you bring reliability down. Hence the 6.7 was born!

Same way with the LLY and LBZ. The LLY came factory with 310 HP. The LBZ was 360 from the factory. Only 50 HP difference. Did GM just stick a tuner on the LLY and "call R good"? Hell no!

Lets look at some of the things GM did instead of just jacking 50 more HP of fuel and timing into the engine:


* Cylinder block casting and machining changes strengthen the bottom of the cylinder bores to support increased horsepower and torque
* Upgraded main bearing material increases durability
* Revised piston design helps lower compression ratio to 16.8:1 from 17.5:1
* Piston pin bore diameter increased for increased strength
* Connecting rod “ I ” section is thicker for increased strength
* Cylinder heads revised to accommodate lower compression and reduced cylinder firing pressure
* Maximum injection pressure increased from 23,000 psi to more than 26,000 psi
* Fuel delivered via higher-pressure pump, fuel rails, distribution lines and all-new, seven-hole fuel injectors

* Fuel injectors spray directly onto glow plugs, providing faster, better-quality starts and more complete cold-start combustion for reduced emissions
* Improved glow plugs heat up faster through an independent controller
* Revised variable-geometry turbocharger is aerodynamically more efficient to help deliver smooth and immediate response and lower emissions
* Air induction system re-tuned to enhance quietness
* EGR has larger cooler to bring more exhaust into the system
* First application of new, 32-bit E35 controller, which adjusts and compensates for the fuel flow to bolster efficiency and reduce emissions

As you can see; that's a hellofalot of mods of do for just 50 HP. New block, new block material, new compression ratio, new pistons, new rods, ect, ect, ect...............hell, it's a totally different engine............all for just 50 more HP!!!!!

Stupid GM. They could have just contracted with Bully Dog and been done with it!! LOL :B

The bottom line is this: Ram or GM or Ford and make lots of power with engines. But, to keep them reliable within the warrantee period and keep them emission legal is a totally, totally, totally different matter!

Yeah, you're right, I'm sorry.

[Turtle_n_Peeps]

That's the same reasoning that some use with the 6.7 engine.

Why didn't Cummins and Ram just stay with the 5.9 engine when all they had to do is put a box on the fuel system and jack the power up to 385 HP? After all, lots of people are putting out over 400 streetable HP out of their 5.9's so why not just stick with the proven engine?


Two of the big reasons are reliability and emissions. When you tack things like DPF's and things like that onto the engine it takes HP away from the wheels. To make that up they had to go to a bigger engine. When you put more emissions on engines you have to bring the power up. When you bring the power up you bring reliability down. Hence the 6.7 was born!

Same way with the LLY and LBZ. The LLY came factory with 310 HP. The LBZ was 360 from the factory. Only 50 HP difference. Did GM just stick a tuner on the LLY and "call R good"? Hell no!

Lets look at some of the things GM did instead of just jacking 50 more HP of fuel and timing into the engine:


* Cylinder block casting and machining changes strengthen the bottom of the cylinder bores to support increased horsepower and torque
* Upgraded main bearing material increases durability
* Revised piston design helps lower compression ratio to 16.8:1 from 17.5:1
* Piston pin bore diameter increased for increased strength
* Connecting rod “ I ” section is thicker for increased strength
* Cylinder heads revised to accommodate lower compression and reduced cylinder firing pressure
* Maximum injection pressure increased from 23,000 psi to more than 26,000 psi
* Fuel delivered via higher-pressure pump, fuel rails, distribution lines and all-new, seven-hole fuel injectors

* Fuel injectors spray directly onto glow plugs, providing faster, better-quality starts and more complete cold-start combustion for reduced emissions
* Improved glow plugs heat up faster through an independent controller
* Revised variable-geometry turbocharger is aerodynamically more efficient to help deliver smooth and immediate response and lower emissions
* Air induction system re-tuned to enhance quietness
* EGR has larger cooler to bring more exhaust into the system
* First application of new, 32-bit E35 controller, which adjusts and compensates for the fuel flow to bolster efficiency and reduce emissions

As you can see; that's a hellofalot of mods of do for just 50 HP. New block, new block material, new compression ratio, new pistons, new rods, ect, ect, ect...............hell, it's a totally different engine............all for just 50 more HP!!!!!

Stupid GM. They could have just contracted with Bully Dog and been done with it!! LOL :B

The bottom line is this: Ram or GM or Ford and make lots of power with engines. But, to keep them reliable within the warrantee period and keep them emission legal is a totally, totally, totally different matter!

[transamz9]

Turtle n Peeps wrote:

transamz9 wrote:

Turtle n Peeps wrote:
I see where you're coming from now.

I was talking peak HP at peak RPM and you're talking HP at peak torque THAT RPM.

I don't have a chart for Cummins latest and greatest. There are several ways Cummins can make more torque without making more HP. Just one is lowering the RPM at peak torque. A chart will show that.

I understand if they keep the RPM the same and the torque goes up they will make slightly more HP at that given RPM.

Again, I was talking about peak HP because I don't have a chart for the newest tune. If you do, please post it up because it will give a clue how Cummins are tuning their engines.

It's going to be interesting how Ram is going to deal with the HP wars. 🙂 Are they going to go with a new V8? Are they going to go with a short stroke design I6? Are they going to throw in the towel and let Ford and GM be top dog?

It's getting to be like 1969 all over again with the 426 Hemi, 428 Ford and the 427 Chevy. :B

It's funny you say Cummins and D-Max are all powered out. tuners prove you wrong on that one. Cooling is the problem, not being able to make the power is not. They can tune them to hold 900 hp all the wat to redline but keeping the temps down would be the problem.

That's like saying that the Hemi in a Ram truck can put out 10,000 reliable HP because I'm watching John Force do it right now on TV. :S

I don't think GM will want to warrantee a 900 HP Dmax based on the block, rod crank combo they have now. Or even a 600 HP Dmax for that matter.

900 lbft @ 3000 RPM is only a little over 500 hp. Very doable now days with drive by wire systems that are capable of detuning on the fly to protect themselves. My black truck is still pulling hard with an 05 5.9 on stock enternals.

[Big1]

Cool, I might have to get one, NOT.

[Turtle_n_Peeps]

transamz9 wrote:

Turtle n Peeps wrote:
I see where you're coming from now.

I was talking peak HP at peak RPM and you're talking HP at peak torque THAT RPM.

I don't have a chart for Cummins latest and greatest. There are several ways Cummins can make more torque without making more HP. Just one is lowering the RPM at peak torque. A chart will show that.

I understand if they keep the RPM the same and the torque goes up they will make slightly more HP at that given RPM.

Again, I was talking about peak HP because I don't have a chart for the newest tune. If you do, please post it up because it will give a clue how Cummins are tuning their engines.

It's going to be interesting how Ram is going to deal with the HP wars. 🙂 Are they going to go with a new V8? Are they going to go with a short stroke design I6? Are they going to throw in the towel and let Ford and GM be top dog?

It's getting to be like 1969 all over again with the 426 Hemi, 428 Ford and the 427 Chevy. :B

It's funny you say Cummins and D-Max are all powered out. tuners prove you wrong on that one. Cooling is the problem, not being able to make the power is not. They can tune them to hold 900 hp all the wat to redline but keeping the temps down would be the problem.

That's like saying that the Hemi in a Ram truck can put out 10,000 reliable HP because I'm watching John Force do it right now on TV. :S

I don't think GM will want to warrantee a 900 HP Dmax based on the block, rod crank combo they have now. Or even a 600 HP Dmax for that matter.

[transamz9]

Turtle n Peeps wrote:
I see where you're coming from now.

I was talking peak HP at peak RPM and you're talking HP at peak torque THAT RPM.

I don't have a chart for Cummins latest and greatest. There are several ways Cummins can make more torque without making more HP. Just one is lowering the RPM at peak torque. A chart will show that.

I understand if they keep the RPM the same and the torque goes up they will make slightly more HP at that given RPM.

Again, I was talking about peak HP because I don't have a chart for the newest tune. If you do, please post it up because it will give a clue how Cummins are tuning their engines.

It's going to be interesting how Ram is going to deal with the HP wars. 🙂 Are they going to go with a new V8? Are they going to go with a short stroke design I6? Are they going to throw in the towel and let Ford and GM be top dog?

It's getting to be like 1969 all over again with the 426 Hemi, 428 Ford and the 427 Chevy. :B

It's funny you say Cummins and D-Max are all powered out. tuners prove you wrong on that one. Cooling is the problem, not being able to make the power is not. They can tune them to hold 900 hp all the wat to redline but keeping the temps down would be the problem.

[transferred]

ha, indeed!

I don't have the chart handy but the 2015 Aisin makes 865b/ft at 1,700rpm and the 2016 900lb/ft at 1,700 also, so off the top of my head that's c.10 or so hp at that towing rpm. Not a lot but a nice little bump nonetheless. Luckily the trans remains the same so we don't have to get into gearing and power at the wheels 🙂

Have a good 4th.

[Turtle_n_Peeps]

I see where you're coming from now.

I was talking peak HP at peak RPM and you're talking HP at peak torque THAT RPM.

I don't have a chart for Cummins latest and greatest. There are several ways Cummins can make more torque without making more HP. Just one is lowering the RPM at peak torque. A chart will show that.

I understand if they keep the RPM the same and the torque goes up they will make slightly more HP at that given RPM.

Again, I was talking about peak HP because I don't have a chart for the newest tune. If you do, please post it up because it will give a clue how Cummins are tuning their engines.

It's going to be interesting how Ram is going to deal with the HP wars. 🙂 Are they going to go with a new V8? Are they going to go with a short stroke design I6? Are they going to throw in the towel and let Ford and GM be top dog?

It's getting to be like 1969 all over again with the 426 Hemi, 428 Ford and the 427 Chevy. :B