AF: AN: Ram 1500 Diesel finally official | Page 5 | Allpar Forums
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

AN: Ram 1500 Diesel finally official

Discussion in 'Vans' started by Allpar News System, Feb 14, 2013.

  1. Mike V.

    Mike V. Mopar-nac The Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    Messages:
    26,427
    Likes:
    22,138
    So you really are not in the market for a light duty truck anyway?

    Mike
     
  2. ptschett

    ptschett Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2004
    Messages:
    843
    Likes:
    144
  3. dyslexic teddybear

    dyslexic teddybear Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    628
    Likes:
    307
    In the future, yes.

    Maybe.

    My summer one, is set up to pull a 5th wheel camper. I hate using that as a work truck. It's never been in the salt, tows perfectly.....i'll keep that one to the end.

    But the work rig......really isn't sized right. 95% of the time it's nearly empty.....the other 5% isn't big enough to be efficient

    It does about 22 mpg.....very good for what it is. The problem is the payback time for increased mpg VS cost of a bigger more efficient second rig.

    A lot will depend on the economy.....if business picks up.....going with a smaller and adding a bigger truck[likely less then 10k a year so used would be much cheaper]may make sense.

    Where fuel $$$, insurance costs goes adds to the variables......
     
  4. AutoTechnician

    AutoTechnician Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Messages:
    1,778
    Likes:
    1,329
    The Scania 15L V8 makes it's peak power 100 RPM lower, and peak torque 200 RPM lower than the ISX15 - as I mentioned in my other post. More power, more torque, at a lower engine speed. The Scania V8 and the Cummins ISX 15 are both current, modern SCR equipped engines for heavy duty trucks of the same class.

    Look at the current Cummins 6.7L and the 6.7L Power Stroke. Still no advantage to the I6.
    Cummins 6.7: [email protected] 2800 RPM, [email protected] 1600 RPM
    Ford 6.7L V8: [email protected] RPM, 800 [email protected] 1600 RPM
     
  5. MoparNorm

    MoparNorm Active Jeeper
    Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2008
    Messages:
    31,138
    Likes:
    7,672
    "Is that Scania smogable or even practical in size and weight at 15 liters?"
    But by saying heavy duty, you answered the question.
    Hardly practical to the discussion of light duty vehicles. ;)
     
  6. AutoTechnician

    AutoTechnician Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Messages:
    1,778
    Likes:
    1,329
    This is what you said: "An inline six inherently develops more torque than an equal displacement V". I found an example proving you wrong. Then you tried to invalidate my point by saying it doesn't apply to light duty vehicles, while at the same time ignoring my other light-duty diesel example which also proved your comment wrong.
     
  7. MoparNorm

    MoparNorm Active Jeeper
    Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2008
    Messages:
    31,138
    Likes:
    7,672
    Comments are supplied in the context of the subject matter.
     
  8. wtxiceman

    wtxiceman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes:
    1,348
    The inline 6 does it more effeciently, less fuel.
     
  9. AutoTechnician

    AutoTechnician Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Messages:
    1,778
    Likes:
    1,329
    The current Duramax and Power Stroke get better fuel economy than the current 6.7 Cummins. The old 12-Valve 5.9 Cummins and 7.3 Power Stroke (the 94-98 Trucks) got more or less the same fuel economy. The old GM 6.2/6.5 also achieved decent economy numbers as well.

    The Scania V8s more or less get the same fuel economy as other I6 equivalents as well.

    Basically, I was just trying to point out that there are a lot of variables to engine design, and that blanket statements such as "An I6 inherently has more torque than a V8 and gets better fuel economy" are not correct.
     
  10. MoparNorm

    MoparNorm Active Jeeper
    Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2008
    Messages:
    31,138
    Likes:
    7,672
    That's assuming one doesn't know the correct definition of inherently. ;)
     
  11. Stratuscaster

    Stratuscaster Vaguely badass...
    Staff Member Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2001
    Messages:
    43,889
    Likes:
    6,642
    If we're done bickering here...I'm all for diesel education, but if we can try and keep it relevant to the subject at hand - which is the light-duty Ram 1500 diesel - that would be great.
     
  12. 66coronet

    66coronet Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2001
    Messages:
    2,020
    Likes:
    169
    I just want it to be so successful that they can not keep up on sales.
     
  13. Ramfan

    Ramfan Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Messages:
    113
    Likes:
    4
    Much as I love the Hemi 8 speed idea I am holding off buy to buy the Ecodiesel as it will do a better job for my tow happy fuel economy useage goals.

    BTW I enjoyed the diesel discussion including the 6.7s & 15 liters. I6 vs V8 has always sort of befuddled me.
     
  14. 66coronet

    66coronet Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2001
    Messages:
    2,020
    Likes:
    169
  15. MoparNorm

    MoparNorm Active Jeeper
    Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2008
    Messages:
    31,138
    Likes:
    7,672
    In perspective, about $2,000 more than a Hemi, for more torque and better mpg. I forget which mag ran the numbers, but they said the payback would be approx. 35,000 miles, or two years, using average, western US, driving habits.
     
  16. Mike V.

    Mike V. Mopar-nac The Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    Messages:
    26,427
    Likes:
    22,138
    That's been posted multiple times

    For the record, the VM costs $4500 move than the Pentastar and $2000 more than a Hemi in a Grand Cherokee.

    How many times can it be posted?

    Mike
     
  17. bumonbox

    bumonbox Say no to kool-aid
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2005
    Messages:
    3,922
    Likes:
    1,011
    Well at least one more:
    Hey guys the VM costs $4500!!!


    Did you know Diesels are commonly more expensive?? Nooooooooo.

    $4500 may be a heck of a premium, but for all intents and purposes, it's a specialty item. This is pretty much true across the board. They ARE more expensive AND they are specialty items, not currently consumed in quantities of the mainstream market. (Except where tractor trailers are concerned, and you are paying a lot for a lot of things, they put a TON of mileage on those things.).

    I expect that they will easily sell everyone. If that happens, they may have to visit working with VM to up capacity. Once that happens, then they could make it more readily available across the board. Once that happens, perhaps the premium will go down. Someone else mentioned that VM has stated they can provide some 40k engines a year. Between the Ram and the GC, they will likely max that number out.

    Hey guys!!! Hey guys. DID YOU SEE??? $4500 EXTRA FOR THE VM!!!! OMG OMG OMG

    DID YOU KNOW DIESELS ARE MORE EXPENSIVE?? DID YOU KNOW THE CUMMINS IS $7800 EXTRA???
     
  18. MoparNorm

    MoparNorm Active Jeeper
    Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2008
    Messages:
    31,138
    Likes:
    7,672
    Duckie would LOVE that relaxed pace, he builds 40,000 Pentastars in about 10 days!
     
  19. Dave Z

    Dave Z It's me, Dave
    Staff Member Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2001
    Messages:
    34,650
    Likes:
    20,040
    I don't know that it's any more relaxed at the VM plant... slower machines, perhaps, or flex lines sharing with other engines, etc... coupled with a much more complex design... and presumably only one line...
     
  20. bumonbox

    bumonbox Say no to kool-aid
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2005
    Messages:
    3,922
    Likes:
    1,011
    40k MORE than what they currently are building. Of course I have no idea what that is.
    That is a hang up, if you don't build another plant, you only have access to what ever spare capacity is "layin' around". Sounds like 40k is that number.
    And I figure, if they meet demand, plus some, that could open to the door to discussion of expansion.
     

Share This Page

Loading...
 We are not affiliated with FCA. We make no claims regarding validity or accuracy of information or advice. Copyright © VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.