Chrysler announces 2013/2014 RAM 1500 Diesel

[OILFIELDTRASH]

The 13 ram with the v6 and the 8 speed trans gets like 25 hwy while making 305HP. I don't really see a diesel doing any better and the fuel costs more as does maintenance.

 

[LTC8K6]

The 13 ram with the v6 and the 8 speed trans gets like 25 hwy while making 305HP. I don't really see a diesel doing any better and the fuel costs more as does maintenance.

Yeah, it's going to be pretty questionable economically.

It will certainly have a torque advantage, but probably not an economic advantage.

 

[Bartman39]

The 13 ram with the v6 and the 8 speed trans gets like 25 hwy while making 305HP. I don't really see a diesel doing any better and the fuel costs more as does maintenance.

Maintenance cost more...? Like as in what not understanding what you mean...?

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

Maintenance cost more...? Like as in what not understanding what you mean...?

http://www.autoweek.com/car-shoppin...s-cost-more-to-own-than-gas-counterparts.html
Facts. Don't let them get in the way of your argument though.

 

[Bartman39]

What facts...? They say stuff but nothing specific just this...? Maintenance cost...? Also depreciation...? More with a diesel...? But what is it in the Maintenance that cost more over a period of time or ownership...? Not an argument just wanting to know...

This may be with diesel car I dunno, see the article looks to be more based on cars...? But with a diesel truck I cant see this...?

 

[SyndromeOCZ]

That's an odd statement. Who's laughing and why? Is there some fundamental flaw in the F150 I'm not aware of?

No, its just a fanboy poke at fun. I think the EcoBoost they have in the F150 is doing pretty well.

The 13 ram with the v6 and the 8 speed trans gets like 25 hwy while making 305HP. I don't really see a diesel doing any better and the fuel costs more as does maintenance.

3.6-liter V6 FFV 24-valve engine producing 305 horsepower at 6,400 rpm and 269 lb-ft of torque at 4,175 rpm.

vs

240 hp and 420-lft of torque.

Though the RPM isn't stated for the diesel I would imagine it starts lower in the RPM range for full torque. When it comes to towing or hauling a load then torque is much more important than horsepower(I personally think torque is more important in every situation).

Even if you don't completely cover the price difference in fuel, having the extra torque when you need it is very well worth the money in my opinion.

 

[rommelrommel]

The one good thing I see coming out of this is that GM & Ford will be forced to finally put a diesel in a 1/2 ton as well...:thumbsup:

Then we shall see some real numbers... (still waiting on the 4.5 Duramax)

4.5 duramax would really be a game changer... frankly it's more than enough motor for a lot of HD buyers and would probably get bought if there was a decent mileage/purchase price advantage.

This motor I don't see being a huge advantage over a hemi, and with the hemi being proven I would go that way if I were looking at a Dodge.

 

[LTC8K6]

Looks like the diesel engine weighs close to 400 pounds more than the 3.6V6 and about 150 pounds more than the 5.7V8.

4X4 Limited GC curb weights, it has really porked up:

3.6 4875
5.7 5135
3.0 5275

IIRC, the curb weight of my 08 4X4 Limited 5.7L is around 4700 pounds.

 

[franksta]

I'm not certain, but I think the last VM Motori engine in the Liberty CRD was a disaster.

That's what I read as well on another board that has quite a few mechanics on it. The general opinion is "crap Italian engines".

Here's the thread http://garagejournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=120709