EEEWWW, they've made it square like the ugly shit-box F-150. I'm a Dodge guy, and I used to think these didn't look so bad on the last two redesigns, but this one is ugly as shit. I will never understand how they managed to sell any of those F-150s ever since they started making them square. A real truck needs to have SOME curves other than the wheel wells...
@SecularTechnology I think it looks better than this box. Surely doesn't take much. A monkey could have designed this better and cost a lot less. I'll say nothing of the powerplant, because they've actually done that properly, but the styling is horrendous.
@mj20042 You must be a shit head if you think that looks bad. Go play with your fucking dolls little kid, this is for big boys. I have a 20 inch lifted '03 power stroke with a bullbar, and I love to run kids over. It makes me orgasm.
@SecularTechnology Lol, 20 inch lift? And have you EVER taken it off road? Even if you have, what the fuck are you compensating for with a 20 inch lift and a brushguard?
Aside from your tastes, you take that truck outside of Super Duty enthusiast circles, I guarantee it wouldn't be as well-recieved as a Dodge or Chevy. The last generation, sure, but not this one. They've messed up the front end and the interior by making it square.
Shut the fuck up with the compensating faggots. I have seena 20 inch lift off-road YES.
I am a FORD and CHEVY truck fan, as a matter of fact I drive an S-10 daily, And you really need to go kill yourself if you think they messed it up. It gives it a much meaner appearance, so fags like you can envy it.
@SecularTechnology So you've SEEN a 20-inch lift? I thought you said you HAD a 20 inch lift. Which is it.
I don't think that square chrome grill gives it a mean appearance, more of a brick appearance. Even if it did, why would I envy it? I've got a 6.7 Cummins. It sounds better and it'll easily last just as long. It might not have the power the new Ford does (which is excellent, I must say), but give Dodge a couple or 3 years, they'll match it, all three companies always do.
Yeah I've "SEEN" a 20 inch lift. And my 0'3 PS is is in Oregon right now, I loaned it to a friend. I love Rams, but I would get the HEMI. As a matter of fact I plan on getting a Dodge Dually with a Hemi 6.4L, As for Cummins fuck that shit. I am in trucking school, I would go with a Freightliner Detroit Diesel.
@SecularTechnology Is Dodge coming out with a new Hemi? I haven't heard of a 6.4L Hemi even in the pipeline, much less already being offered. The only Hemis I've heard of being available for the 3/4 and 1-ton trucks are the two 5.7L Hemis. The MDS 345hp one and the 397hp normal engine.
@SecularTechnology And why would you opt for the less powerful, less fuel-efficient gas-powered engine instead of a Cummins which will last longer and be a ton easier to modify?
@SecularTechnology Ok, so Allpar says it will have 475 hp, only because it gets durability issues beyond that. So unless you redo the pistons and possibly cylinder liners, that engine wouldn't survive the power levels the Cummins can handle, and even with MDS, that's not going to get fuel mileage comparable to the diesels, because it's fueled by gasoline.
So, an easy choice for me: Cummins all the way, because it'll sound better, last longer, and have a much higher power capacity.
A Cummins is a fucking I-6 and pickups shouldn't be I-6's Nah the Cummins will last a bit longer because it's a Diesel, but I never liked the the damn thing.
The Cummins only has more Torque, and it will probably have a higher maximum tow rating, but I only haul.
@SecularTechnology And another issue: If you're serious about towing you get the manual transmission, right? Well, if you do you can't get MDS, so the mileage will suffer accordingly. So that's even further in the favor of the Cummins.
No, not interested. I only haul, as I said in the below comment. Nothing puts in in favor of a Cummins, case closed. Diesels get better mileage in General... You don't get the gas if you're looking for mileage.
@SecularTechnology Well, obviously you don't get the gas for the mileage, because guaranteed, if you haul stuff or you don't keep your foot out of it, that mileage is gonna drop into single digits without a second thought. But my Cummins has NEVER dropped below 12, and that was beating the crap out of the throttle, towing an enclosed trailer, and bucking a headwind. Not to mention, it's on 70k miles, and it's never had an issue, even with the 6-speed automatic transmission.
Yeah, that's why I said that. Like I said, I only haul, I don't need to tow anything. Milage isn't an issue, I'm wouldn't even drive it every day. I have a car for that. I'd probably get a smaller trailer, 5,000 pounds about no more. I've seen cars with 70K and they have regular tuning as well, not surprising at all.
@SecularTechnology Well, the thing is, 70k in a gas truck, having the throttle down frequently, towing 10k + lbs fairly often, with an aftermarket intake, the engine would have certainly had some issues by that point. The Cummins just doesn't feel like it's done 70k hard miles, it feels brand new. A gas engine would be feeling the strain after 70k hard miles. And a car shouldn't be compared to a work truck, because a car doesn't go through the strain of towing more than it's own weight.
Like I said I'll tow about 5k. I've had a GMC pickup 1500, and it wen't through only tune ups, and oil changes to 80k before I saw the engine light on. There are several cars that can tow more than there own weight, say a Toyota small pickup is unibody frame, yet it grosses over twice it's weight,.
@SecularTechnology Yeah, but even then that's not a car, that's a truck, that's the only reason. A standard passenger car lasts as long as it does because it doesn't take the strain of much more than its own weight. The standard passenger car is designed to last for a few hundred thousand miles under the strain of stock power, and a little more than it's own weight, even under full throttle. Gas engines are built with weaker components than diesels, even in trucks, so they don't withstand much.
Just beause somethings, classified as a truck doesn't mean it's going to last longer, technically since the Toyota is unibody, they could have just put a standard car body on -- It would still tow as much, but it just wouldn't be classified as a truck. As for reliablility, it would be exactly the same, because everything is untouched besides the frame. Gas engines, actually have less strain on the due to lower-compression,
@SecularTechnology The reason the Toyota tows is because its set up as a truck, with different axle ratios from a car, a tougher transmission, etc. But you don't just put a car body on a unibody vehicle, because the lines of a unibody car are the structure. So to change a unibody truck into a car would mean changing the very essence of the vehicle.
Now, for the engines, I was talking more about external strain. The gas engines are made with weaker components and withstand less external force.
It's not "set up as a truck", and actually, many sports cars have the SAME axel ratio as a heavy duty truck. And an old Toyota mid-size doesn't use a stronger transmission. Actually YOU CAN put a car body on a unibody truck. As a matter of fact it's been done several times. The reason you can't on a body-on is the beefy frame forces the frame to be higher off the ground.
@SecularTechnology Yeah, the toyota truck would be set up as a truck. It would have axles, instead of IRS, and most likely even the small truck you're talking about would have 4WD. The rear suspension would be stiffer than a typical car's, and it would have a cab rather than a passenger compartment. That leads me into the second point: the Monocoque chassis would encompass the cab of the truck, the corners of the engine bay, and presumably the edges of the bed of the truck.
If a vehicle is unibody, it is called car-based, and if it's unibody you would call it a truck frame. There are several modifications you would make to make it a pickup obviously, but not necesserily the axel ratio. The Isuzu P'up and the Isuzu Aska both has a 4:10 rear end.
The main point is a the end result is still the unibody platform in which a "car" was made but modified to be a "truck".
@SecularTechnology Ok, I'm not picking up on the first bit. Clarify please. If it's a unibody, then the form of the truck IS the structure, and you wouldn't take a car structure and turn it into a truck, you'd make the structure specific to the truck. Now if the cab and bed of the truck are one piece, then it's not a car, it's a unibody truck, *not* a car modified to be a truck. You might alter the design of a car unibody, but you wouldn't turn the physical car unibody into a truck.
You should know that several histornical pickups use the same platform/chassis as another either mid-sized or full-sized car. Actually you WOULd take a car structure and turn it into a truck because it's been done several times. Isuzu P'up for example. When someone says car-based, they mean unibody.
@SecularTechnology Ok, but again, you'd just alter the design and *make* an entirely different chassis. You wouldn't alter the physical structure to change it into a pickup, it'd be too time consuming. Car-based means the design is derived from that of a car.
Now, those historical pickups that were based on cars would have been made back when it was still body-on-frame design, when cars were still pinned onto frame-rails. Those days it was easy to stick a different body on a rolling frame.
Well see for yourself. Take the Ford D3 platform for example. You have the new Taurus which probably can't tow 3,000 pounds, and you have the new Explorer which can tow 5,000 which is not something very characteristic of an Unibodies. Sure the Explorer has been beefed up, but in the beginning they both use the same platform.
@SecularTechnology So in order to turn a Toyota small pickup into a passenger car, you'd have to do so much cutting and welding, not to mention fabricating, that it would be completely retarded to take the time to do it, since most modern trucks have room for 5 people anyway.
As for Diesels being built with stronger components. They are only built toughter in the sense that they have to resist a longer, and higher compression. The longer strokes is why the weigh so much. I've seen several diesel and gas side by side comparisons in out local shop.
And gas actually has more advantages than you say.
Maintenence Advantage. Thanks to a diesels larger amount of oil. Also Fuel filters and water separtors are serviced more often. Also spark plugs, anti-freeze
@SecularTechnology Yeah, they're built with cast iron blocks, from the factory, huge head studs, stronger pistons and connecting rods, as far as I know they also have stronger crankshafts to cope with the higher torque. Diesel Power did an article listing everything diesels had that was industrial strength. I don't remember it all, but most of the components were stronger, heavier metals.
Diesels have a longer service interval than gas engines, typically. At least the Cummins (15k, I think)
WHAT? Several gas engines have gas Iron blocks, and the only reason they are built stronger is because they have higher compression, that would explain why the components are stronger.
Diesel Power magazine stated themselves, that shot term maintnence is HIGHER with a diesel engine. Cummins is not exception, feel free to look up the article. It's because they have a higher volume of oil mainly, and the fuel filters and water separators in diesels are serviced mor often.
@SecularTechnology I'm not saying that diesel engines are inherently stronger. I'm just saying they're built better because the fuel has a higher energy content than gas and the compression needed to ignite it means the engines need to be built stronger. I'm just saying that the diesel engine would have that advantage from the factory over the 6.4L. You could spend a large amount of money making the gas engine that strong, but yeah - large amount of money spent on a less-efficient motor.
Yeah I said what you just said twice. Maybe even 3 times. I already know, that the Cummins Diesel will have advantages.
Diesels produce some 16% more energy at any given time, which gives them an undisputed advantage right away, but most of the energy is given as torque. A gas engine will usually have a greater number, or a smaller number of torque then the gas engine depending a lot of times on liter size, and how high it revs. The 6.4 has almost as much torque as hp.
@SecularTechnology On the subject of maintenance intervals: there is a huge market for aftermarket filters for diesel engines (and yes, even on the cummins, duramax, and powerstroke diesels, not just big trucks), such as FASS, and there's an oil filter that does high volume, and down to a few microns of filtration, there used to be ads for it in Diesel Power, but I can't think of the name. That filter's supposed to extend the interval quite a bit. You don't see those kinds of products for gas.
Even with the aftermarket I don't think they will get it down to what a gas engine does, and you still have the water separators that have to be serviced all the time, and lack of spark plugs.
@SecularTechnology You'd be surprised what aftermarket stuff can do. And I don't know that the water separators on the newest engines need that much attention.
Now what about a lack of spark plugs? What does that have to do with it? That only extends the maintenance interval, because the glow plugs don't need to be replaced as often as spark plugs.
Yeah, I'm sure there are things you can do to a gas engine to extend service intervals. According to Truck Trend spark plugs require less maintnece than hot air compression.
@SecularTechnology Well, I dunno about that. My old 5.9 went past 100k miles and I never needed the glow plugs replaced or serviced. The engine ran like a dream until I traded it for my 6.7L, just oil changes and regular filter changes (can't remember how often the air filters got replaced, but driving on gravel, it might have been as often as 10 or 15k). In fact, I think the only thing that ever went wrong was a U-joint on the driveshaft needed to be replaced.
Yeah the 5.9 was very reliable. Also I've noticed a lot of the people I talk to like that era-Rams more, truck-like driving dynamics, where as the modern one I guess tends to have more car-like dyanimcs.
@SecularTechnology Well, honestly I would have preferred the 5.9's fuel economy with the 6.7's driving feel and power. The 6.7 has such awesome grip, great brakes, and nice smooth steering feel. The 5.9 was just so rough and loud, even at idle (though not as bad with the common-rail as the 12V or 24Vs were), and not as nice sounding as the 12 or 24Vs (the ones you could hear a mile away at idle) to pull off the noise. I'd like to get a DPF delete kit or a programmer that bypasses it.
If you got the 6.7 you sacrificed reliability right there. I don't know what you're talking about, about the mile away thing, because my uncle has a 12v, and it has some sort of sound supression device on it. The Cummins turbo silencer ring. Something that the Chev, and Ford lacked, so they tended to be louder.
@SecularTechnology Well, I don't know which cummins it was, but it was second- or third-gen (12 or 24V, after the body restyle in 93), and it sounded like a big-rig, except deeper, and a ton louder. Like the exhaust was made to belt out as much sound as possible, and you could hear it at least 2 blocks away at idle, and *easily* a mile away under any throttle. I don't know if it was that way from the factory or these were all straight-pipe trucks, but they were LOUD.
@SecularTechnology Well, like I said, they were the older 5.9 engines (pre-03 or so), and they very well may have been straight-piped, but regardless those were loud engines from the factory anyway.
Now, I've heard the 7.3L in the Excursion, and that's not as loud as those Cummins I've heard. It's certainly a loud engine (unfortunately, not all the sound is exhaust, it's a pretty clattery beast), but these were louder, and all exhaust.
There could be a silencer ring in the Excursion, or the newer gen 7.3's. And I know there's a loud Cummins, but they were all very loud back in the day. Now the Super Duty engine is probably the quitest.
And another thing, I sure as hell want to get a the gasser before Fiat puts the Multi-air stuff in it. Sure it will bring out more power, and save fuel economy. But I've allways thought American vehicle should stay American. Just go to an old Van forum and you'll see posts wanting Dodge to make there own van again. Which is something that isn't going to happen for a while, as it's adopting the Fiat Ducato.
@SecularTechnology Now wait a minute, I've just noticed you said the 6.4 would have more torque? The only figures Allpar gives say that it will only have 460 lb-ft of torque... The Cummins produces 660 lb-ft. And seeing as torque is the important number when towing, the only advantage of the 6.4 would be that the truck would be faster (lighter engine and more hp). The Cummins is still the better engine for towing, fuel economy, and reliability, no matter which way you look at it.
When did I say that? I've known that the Cummins will have more torque. I don't think I said that, but if I did, it was a speech slip. The Torque will probably be a little higher or a little lower than the Hp. 460 Lb.-Ft sounds about right.
I don't even know if it's going to be faster, I mean the 660 Lb.-Ft would sure jerk it off the line.
The main reason I would get the 6.4 Gas is because I love V-8 engines.
@SecularTechnology Fair enough on the last part, but the Cummins still sounds as good as the V8, and you get a turbo whistle to go along with it. I say that's pure awesome, hearing that big turbo spooling when you drop your foot to the floor and feeling that huge surge of power the very next second.
But yeah, the gas would be quicker, because the engine would be a bunch lighter (diesel engines trump 1k lbs pretty easily, even an 8.4 Viper engine, aluminum block, only reaches about 5-600 lbs)
Yeah, but I'm a V-8 lover. Yeah, I know the gas would be lighter, and probably quicker to 60, but trying to be unbiased here, I think the torque of the Cummins would make it feel more snappy off the line.
For example the Jetta TDI is actually slower than the Jetta gas to 60, but it feels a lot quicker. And the TDI is some 300 pound heavier.
@SecularTechnology The torque does make it feel snappy, but I think with the power rating of the 6.4 combined with the drop in weight would make it feel just as snappy. But the thing is, I think, that because of the durability issues, the diesel would be the engine to choose, because even the speed advantage of the gas disappears when you can sink money into power upgrades for the Cummins. Stock for stock is the only way the gas wins a race.
Yeah, we already discussed Durability, DIESELS are more reliable, that's a fact. Just like it's a fact that they have higher compression, which produced more torque. I don't see the gas for the Speed advantage. I'm sure it will do about 7 seconds or so to 60, becuase it's heavier than the Ram 1500. Stock for Stock, the gas wins because it's a V-8. a V-8 pickup at that.
@SecularTechnology Number of cylinders has little to do with it, honestly. Size, build quality, and design makes up for 95% or more of an engine's capabilities.
For example, inline engines typically make torque more easily (not sure why, but they do) and last longer, but are impractical in most vehicles (I-6s are highest cylinder count engines used in cars since about 1930 or so), so haven't caught on. That's why the Cummins is so reliable and makes power so easily when upgraded.
Actually numver of cylinders has to do with it a ton. Because a V-8 is a V-8. That I-6 torque, is actually a myth. Commercial companies started out using I-6's because they fit the easiest in a Semiengine. The strongest engines used in Europe (Scania, Mercedes trucks, Volvo, MAN,) All top out with more Hp, and A lot more torque than American trucks. And they actually use the same cylinder. And Cummins, 6.7L isn't more reliable than any other.
@SecularTechnology I've heard the Euro trucks top out higher. Scania, especially, makes super high-output engines.
But you check Wikipedia, 'Straight-six engine' and it will tell you, that the inline six diesel engine is used in 'virtually every medium-duty to large over-the-road trucks' and says 'It's virtues are superior low-end torque, very long service life, smooth operation, and dependability.'
@SecularTechnology Ok, so you just told me right there, that the Cummins I-6 is more reliable than a V-8, but you said earlier it was no more reliable.
As for the Scania, I'm not into large trucks, so I have no solid explanation for why the Scania engine would be more powerful. My best guess is that it's down to the tuning (different timing, fuel injection amounts, etc). That's not so much a feature as a difference in expertise, I guess.
In General I-6's are more reliable because of the much fewer moving parts, and I will admit the 12v was awarded the most reliable I believe. But with the coming of the 6.7, whether that itself was unreliable or Duramax and Power Strokes became more reliable, truck magazines don't seem to think so.
Several times it's (down to the tuning) because so many times I have seen V-8 Diesels more powerul than I-6's. Almost all high-end Euro motors use V-8's while the lower ends are I-6's.
@SecularTechnology I don't know that reliability is any different between the current crop of light-truck diesels, and I don't think I said the Cummins was any more reliable than the rest in the first place, just more reliable than gas (I'm sticking to the argument between the Dodge with a 6.4 HEMI and a 6.7 Cummins).
Again, I'm not into big trucks, so my opinion on those is honestly null. I don't know that the number of cylinders specifically has anything to do with it, just space issues.
I already said I know that the diesel model will be more reliable. But I would go for the gas because for one It will probably be cheaper. But also I've allways wanted a dually gasser. One that has a decent amount of power too, sure it doesn't have the torque of the Cummins.
I think this will be a first to allow a gas engine ina dually. Maybe Silvy's can, but they use the weak 6.0, as opposed to the more powerfull 6.0, which would have been a better choice.
@SecularTechnology LOL, Chevy has an 8.1L gas engine (or used to) that makes less power than the new 6.4 HEMI. They were offered in the Silverado HD (which I believe would also have been available with that engine in dually form). I know Dodge and Ford also had large gas engines for their HD trucks (The 8.0L V10 the original Viper motor was based on was the Dodge one), so I assume those would have been available with gas in dually form as well.
@SecularTechnology The 8.1 is like one of those old 60s and 70s mid-range engines (mostly non-Mopar engines) that had huge displacement, and very little power.
Sounds like the 6.0, and 8.1 Vortec. They don't have any Hp grabbing technology like VCT, or DOHC. And of course they're gas engines , so they don't have a turbo like a diesel does.
@SecularTechnology In essence, they're *kinda* like the Viper engine: 8.0, 8.3, or 8.4 they were all massive engines and they were pushrod, OHV, 2 valves per cylinder, so they made little power for their size (except the 8.4, that's a little better @ 600HP). Hennessey knew that, though, and did something about it XD. Twin turbo, 1200hp!
@SecularTechnology Just as a side-note: Who the fuck are you to be saying I'm a little kid that plays with dolls? And for that matter, what's up with your last comment? You like "to run kids over. It makes me orgasm." Is it supposed to be a credit to your argument or your sense of taste that you have a sick sense of humor and a twisted mind?
Yeah I like to run kids over, and I called you a kid. THAT'S WHAT THE FUCK. I have an orgasm when I do it. Yes I have a twisted mind. And I like Fords and Chevy's so get that right.
im sorry but at some point in these truck power wars between the diesels there is gonna be a major problem with transmitting all that power to the ground? am i right or am i right!!!
Fucking Dodge boys are just pissed because Ford has made a good diesel the 6.7 to redem them selfs after the 6.0 junk. The durajoke boys are pissed because they are getting farther behind in the diesel world!!! LET THE POWERSTROKE LIVE ON!!!
Fucking Dodge boys are just pissed because Ford has made a good diesel the 6.7 to redem them selfs after the 6.0 junk. The durajoke boys are pissed because they are getting farther behind in the diesel world!!! LET THE POWERSTROKE LIVE ON!!!
Them fucking Dodge boys are just pissed because Ford has made a good diesel the 6.7 to redem them selfs after the 6.0 junk. The durajoke boys are pissed because they are getting farther behind in the diesel world!!! LET THE POWERSTROKE LIVE ON!!!
@Techie223 Not loud enough? LOL. Finally a man that realizes a diesel shouldn't be quiet. I'm a Ford guy myself, but can't knock a Cummins. They are monsters.
Truck looks great!! I'm thinking of trading my 05 F250 for a crew cab short bed 4x4 with the 6.2 Gas. Can you can a locking diff with the manual shift 4wheel drive?
@rumerboyz Electric locking only available as said on SRW, limited slips are DRW. Highest locker is 3.55, 4x4 available, and there are no manual transmissions. 6 speed automatic with tow haul and semi automatic mode.
I want one.
MrMichael1701 4 months ago
I like Fords but these have got to be the ugliest trucks that Ford has ever made.
Rebelwon 6 months ago
that 735 pds or torque is pure bull makes alot less than on paper its been proven plus it would most likely break before it reaches 100,000 miles
zrultima 6 months ago
800 POUNDS OF TORQUE BABY
you could tow a 747 with this thing
liftedview 1 year ago 2
*6.2*
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
What an Ugly looking truck... Wow!!! O-o
Aonexia 1 year ago
@Aonexia
Shut up you shit face. WOW FUCK YOU>
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology I love you...)
Aonexia 1 year ago
Cool.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
Locking differential is a beautiful thing if you spend time off the pavement
hotshotalot 1 year ago
Nice Truck.
uoweme50 1 year ago
EEEWWW, they've made it square like the ugly shit-box F-150. I'm a Dodge guy, and I used to think these didn't look so bad on the last two redesigns, but this one is ugly as shit. I will never understand how they managed to sell any of those F-150s ever since they started making them square. A real truck needs to have SOME curves other than the wheel wells...
mj20042 1 year ago 2
@mj20042
Well I think the new Dodge redisign looks like a FUCKING pile of shit, so the world still goes round eh? Go fuck yourself.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology I think it looks better than this box. Surely doesn't take much. A monkey could have designed this better and cost a lot less. I'll say nothing of the powerplant, because they've actually done that properly, but the styling is horrendous.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042 You must be a shit head if you think that looks bad. Go play with your fucking dolls little kid, this is for big boys. I have a 20 inch lifted '03 power stroke with a bullbar, and I love to run kids over. It makes me orgasm.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology Lol, 20 inch lift? And have you EVER taken it off road? Even if you have, what the fuck are you compensating for with a 20 inch lift and a brushguard?
Aside from your tastes, you take that truck outside of Super Duty enthusiast circles, I guarantee it wouldn't be as well-recieved as a Dodge or Chevy. The last generation, sure, but not this one. They've messed up the front end and the interior by making it square.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
Shut the fuck up with the compensating faggots. I have seena 20 inch lift off-road YES.
I am a FORD and CHEVY truck fan, as a matter of fact I drive an S-10 daily, And you really need to go kill yourself if you think they messed it up. It gives it a much meaner appearance, so fags like you can envy it.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology So you've SEEN a 20-inch lift? I thought you said you HAD a 20 inch lift. Which is it.
I don't think that square chrome grill gives it a mean appearance, more of a brick appearance. Even if it did, why would I envy it? I've got a 6.7 Cummins. It sounds better and it'll easily last just as long. It might not have the power the new Ford does (which is excellent, I must say), but give Dodge a couple or 3 years, they'll match it, all three companies always do.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
Yeah I've "SEEN" a 20 inch lift. And my 0'3 PS is is in Oregon right now, I loaned it to a friend. I love Rams, but I would get the HEMI. As a matter of fact I plan on getting a Dodge Dually with a Hemi 6.4L, As for Cummins fuck that shit. I am in trucking school, I would go with a Freightliner Detroit Diesel.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology Is Dodge coming out with a new Hemi? I haven't heard of a 6.4L Hemi even in the pipeline, much less already being offered. The only Hemis I've heard of being available for the 3/4 and 1-ton trucks are the two 5.7L Hemis. The MDS 345hp one and the 397hp normal engine.
mj20042 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology And why would you opt for the less powerful, less fuel-efficient gas-powered engine instead of a Cummins which will last longer and be a ton easier to modify?
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
Dodge plans to make the 6.4 Hemi the dominant Ram heavy duty engine. It will have A LOT more Hp, and significantly more Torque.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology Ok, so Allpar says it will have 475 hp, only because it gets durability issues beyond that. So unless you redo the pistons and possibly cylinder liners, that engine wouldn't survive the power levels the Cummins can handle, and even with MDS, that's not going to get fuel mileage comparable to the diesels, because it's fueled by gasoline.
So, an easy choice for me: Cummins all the way, because it'll sound better, last longer, and have a much higher power capacity.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
A Cummins is a fucking I-6 and pickups shouldn't be I-6's Nah the Cummins will last a bit longer because it's a Diesel, but I never liked the the damn thing.
The Cummins only has more Torque, and it will probably have a higher maximum tow rating, but I only haul.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology And another issue: If you're serious about towing you get the manual transmission, right? Well, if you do you can't get MDS, so the mileage will suffer accordingly. So that's even further in the favor of the Cummins.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
No, not interested. I only haul, as I said in the below comment. Nothing puts in in favor of a Cummins, case closed. Diesels get better mileage in General... You don't get the gas if you're looking for mileage.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology Well, obviously you don't get the gas for the mileage, because guaranteed, if you haul stuff or you don't keep your foot out of it, that mileage is gonna drop into single digits without a second thought. But my Cummins has NEVER dropped below 12, and that was beating the crap out of the throttle, towing an enclosed trailer, and bucking a headwind. Not to mention, it's on 70k miles, and it's never had an issue, even with the 6-speed automatic transmission.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
Yeah, that's why I said that. Like I said, I only haul, I don't need to tow anything. Milage isn't an issue, I'm wouldn't even drive it every day. I have a car for that. I'd probably get a smaller trailer, 5,000 pounds about no more. I've seen cars with 70K and they have regular tuning as well, not surprising at all.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology Well, the thing is, 70k in a gas truck, having the throttle down frequently, towing 10k + lbs fairly often, with an aftermarket intake, the engine would have certainly had some issues by that point. The Cummins just doesn't feel like it's done 70k hard miles, it feels brand new. A gas engine would be feeling the strain after 70k hard miles. And a car shouldn't be compared to a work truck, because a car doesn't go through the strain of towing more than it's own weight.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
Like I said I'll tow about 5k. I've had a GMC pickup 1500, and it wen't through only tune ups, and oil changes to 80k before I saw the engine light on. There are several cars that can tow more than there own weight, say a Toyota small pickup is unibody frame, yet it grosses over twice it's weight,.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology Yeah, but even then that's not a car, that's a truck, that's the only reason. A standard passenger car lasts as long as it does because it doesn't take the strain of much more than its own weight. The standard passenger car is designed to last for a few hundred thousand miles under the strain of stock power, and a little more than it's own weight, even under full throttle. Gas engines are built with weaker components than diesels, even in trucks, so they don't withstand much.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
Just beause somethings, classified as a truck doesn't mean it's going to last longer, technically since the Toyota is unibody, they could have just put a standard car body on -- It would still tow as much, but it just wouldn't be classified as a truck. As for reliablility, it would be exactly the same, because everything is untouched besides the frame. Gas engines, actually have less strain on the due to lower-compression,
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology The reason the Toyota tows is because its set up as a truck, with different axle ratios from a car, a tougher transmission, etc. But you don't just put a car body on a unibody vehicle, because the lines of a unibody car are the structure. So to change a unibody truck into a car would mean changing the very essence of the vehicle.
Now, for the engines, I was talking more about external strain. The gas engines are made with weaker components and withstand less external force.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
It's not "set up as a truck", and actually, many sports cars have the SAME axel ratio as a heavy duty truck. And an old Toyota mid-size doesn't use a stronger transmission. Actually YOU CAN put a car body on a unibody truck. As a matter of fact it's been done several times. The reason you can't on a body-on is the beefy frame forces the frame to be higher off the ground.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology Yeah, the toyota truck would be set up as a truck. It would have axles, instead of IRS, and most likely even the small truck you're talking about would have 4WD. The rear suspension would be stiffer than a typical car's, and it would have a cab rather than a passenger compartment. That leads me into the second point: the Monocoque chassis would encompass the cab of the truck, the corners of the engine bay, and presumably the edges of the bed of the truck.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
If a vehicle is unibody, it is called car-based, and if it's unibody you would call it a truck frame. There are several modifications you would make to make it a pickup obviously, but not necesserily the axel ratio. The Isuzu P'up and the Isuzu Aska both has a 4:10 rear end.
The main point is a the end result is still the unibody platform in which a "car" was made but modified to be a "truck".
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology Ok, I'm not picking up on the first bit. Clarify please. If it's a unibody, then the form of the truck IS the structure, and you wouldn't take a car structure and turn it into a truck, you'd make the structure specific to the truck. Now if the cab and bed of the truck are one piece, then it's not a car, it's a unibody truck, *not* a car modified to be a truck. You might alter the design of a car unibody, but you wouldn't turn the physical car unibody into a truck.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
Now I'm not following you...
You should know that several histornical pickups use the same platform/chassis as another either mid-sized or full-sized car. Actually you WOULd take a car structure and turn it into a truck because it's been done several times. Isuzu P'up for example. When someone says car-based, they mean unibody.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology Ok, but again, you'd just alter the design and *make* an entirely different chassis. You wouldn't alter the physical structure to change it into a pickup, it'd be too time consuming. Car-based means the design is derived from that of a car.
Now, those historical pickups that were based on cars would have been made back when it was still body-on-frame design, when cars were still pinned onto frame-rails. Those days it was easy to stick a different body on a rolling frame.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
Well see for yourself. Take the Ford D3 platform for example. You have the new Taurus which probably can't tow 3,000 pounds, and you have the new Explorer which can tow 5,000 which is not something very characteristic of an Unibodies. Sure the Explorer has been beefed up, but in the beginning they both use the same platform.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology So in order to turn a Toyota small pickup into a passenger car, you'd have to do so much cutting and welding, not to mention fabricating, that it would be completely retarded to take the time to do it, since most modern trucks have room for 5 people anyway.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
As for Diesels being built with stronger components. They are only built toughter in the sense that they have to resist a longer, and higher compression. The longer strokes is why the weigh so much. I've seen several diesel and gas side by side comparisons in out local shop.
And gas actually has more advantages than you say.
Maintenence Advantage. Thanks to a diesels larger amount of oil. Also Fuel filters and water separtors are serviced more often. Also spark plugs, anti-freeze
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology Yeah, they're built with cast iron blocks, from the factory, huge head studs, stronger pistons and connecting rods, as far as I know they also have stronger crankshafts to cope with the higher torque. Diesel Power did an article listing everything diesels had that was industrial strength. I don't remember it all, but most of the components were stronger, heavier metals.
Diesels have a longer service interval than gas engines, typically. At least the Cummins (15k, I think)
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
WHAT? Several gas engines have gas Iron blocks, and the only reason they are built stronger is because they have higher compression, that would explain why the components are stronger.
Diesel Power magazine stated themselves, that shot term maintnence is HIGHER with a diesel engine. Cummins is not exception, feel free to look up the article. It's because they have a higher volume of oil mainly, and the fuel filters and water separators in diesels are serviced mor often.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology I'm not saying that diesel engines are inherently stronger. I'm just saying they're built better because the fuel has a higher energy content than gas and the compression needed to ignite it means the engines need to be built stronger. I'm just saying that the diesel engine would have that advantage from the factory over the 6.4L. You could spend a large amount of money making the gas engine that strong, but yeah - large amount of money spent on a less-efficient motor.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
Yeah I said what you just said twice. Maybe even 3 times. I already know, that the Cummins Diesel will have advantages.
Diesels produce some 16% more energy at any given time, which gives them an undisputed advantage right away, but most of the energy is given as torque. A gas engine will usually have a greater number, or a smaller number of torque then the gas engine depending a lot of times on liter size, and how high it revs. The 6.4 has almost as much torque as hp.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology On the subject of maintenance intervals: there is a huge market for aftermarket filters for diesel engines (and yes, even on the cummins, duramax, and powerstroke diesels, not just big trucks), such as FASS, and there's an oil filter that does high volume, and down to a few microns of filtration, there used to be ads for it in Diesel Power, but I can't think of the name. That filter's supposed to extend the interval quite a bit. You don't see those kinds of products for gas.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
Even with the aftermarket I don't think they will get it down to what a gas engine does, and you still have the water separators that have to be serviced all the time, and lack of spark plugs.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology You'd be surprised what aftermarket stuff can do. And I don't know that the water separators on the newest engines need that much attention.
Now what about a lack of spark plugs? What does that have to do with it? That only extends the maintenance interval, because the glow plugs don't need to be replaced as often as spark plugs.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
Yeah, I'm sure there are things you can do to a gas engine to extend service intervals. According to Truck Trend spark plugs require less maintnece than hot air compression.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology Well, I dunno about that. My old 5.9 went past 100k miles and I never needed the glow plugs replaced or serviced. The engine ran like a dream until I traded it for my 6.7L, just oil changes and regular filter changes (can't remember how often the air filters got replaced, but driving on gravel, it might have been as often as 10 or 15k). In fact, I think the only thing that ever went wrong was a U-joint on the driveshaft needed to be replaced.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
Yeah the 5.9 was very reliable. Also I've noticed a lot of the people I talk to like that era-Rams more, truck-like driving dynamics, where as the modern one I guess tends to have more car-like dyanimcs.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology Well, honestly I would have preferred the 5.9's fuel economy with the 6.7's driving feel and power. The 6.7 has such awesome grip, great brakes, and nice smooth steering feel. The 5.9 was just so rough and loud, even at idle (though not as bad with the common-rail as the 12V or 24Vs were), and not as nice sounding as the 12 or 24Vs (the ones you could hear a mile away at idle) to pull off the noise. I'd like to get a DPF delete kit or a programmer that bypasses it.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
If you got the 6.7 you sacrificed reliability right there. I don't know what you're talking about, about the mile away thing, because my uncle has a 12v, and it has some sort of sound supression device on it. The Cummins turbo silencer ring. Something that the Chev, and Ford lacked, so they tended to be louder.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology Well, I don't know which cummins it was, but it was second- or third-gen (12 or 24V, after the body restyle in 93), and it sounded like a big-rig, except deeper, and a ton louder. Like the exhaust was made to belt out as much sound as possible, and you could hear it at least 2 blocks away at idle, and *easily* a mile away under any throttle. I don't know if it was that way from the factory or these were all straight-pipe trucks, but they were LOUD.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
I think a mile, is pushing it. I've heard pretty much all gen Cummins, and I know none were louder then the 7.3 International.
It was probably an earlier gen Cummins 12v
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology Well, like I said, they were the older 5.9 engines (pre-03 or so), and they very well may have been straight-piped, but regardless those were loud engines from the factory anyway.
Now, I've heard the 7.3L in the Excursion, and that's not as loud as those Cummins I've heard. It's certainly a loud engine (unfortunately, not all the sound is exhaust, it's a pretty clattery beast), but these were louder, and all exhaust.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
There could be a silencer ring in the Excursion, or the newer gen 7.3's. And I know there's a loud Cummins, but they were all very loud back in the day. Now the Super Duty engine is probably the quitest.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@mj20042
And another thing, I sure as hell want to get a the gasser before Fiat puts the Multi-air stuff in it. Sure it will bring out more power, and save fuel economy. But I've allways thought American vehicle should stay American. Just go to an old Van forum and you'll see posts wanting Dodge to make there own van again. Which is something that isn't going to happen for a while, as it's adopting the Fiat Ducato.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology Now wait a minute, I've just noticed you said the 6.4 would have more torque? The only figures Allpar gives say that it will only have 460 lb-ft of torque... The Cummins produces 660 lb-ft. And seeing as torque is the important number when towing, the only advantage of the 6.4 would be that the truck would be faster (lighter engine and more hp). The Cummins is still the better engine for towing, fuel economy, and reliability, no matter which way you look at it.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
When did I say that? I've known that the Cummins will have more torque. I don't think I said that, but if I did, it was a speech slip. The Torque will probably be a little higher or a little lower than the Hp. 460 Lb.-Ft sounds about right.
I don't even know if it's going to be faster, I mean the 660 Lb.-Ft would sure jerk it off the line.
The main reason I would get the 6.4 Gas is because I love V-8 engines.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology Fair enough on the last part, but the Cummins still sounds as good as the V8, and you get a turbo whistle to go along with it. I say that's pure awesome, hearing that big turbo spooling when you drop your foot to the floor and feeling that huge surge of power the very next second.
But yeah, the gas would be quicker, because the engine would be a bunch lighter (diesel engines trump 1k lbs pretty easily, even an 8.4 Viper engine, aluminum block, only reaches about 5-600 lbs)
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
Yeah, but I'm a V-8 lover. Yeah, I know the gas would be lighter, and probably quicker to 60, but trying to be unbiased here, I think the torque of the Cummins would make it feel more snappy off the line.
For example the Jetta TDI is actually slower than the Jetta gas to 60, but it feels a lot quicker. And the TDI is some 300 pound heavier.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology The torque does make it feel snappy, but I think with the power rating of the 6.4 combined with the drop in weight would make it feel just as snappy. But the thing is, I think, that because of the durability issues, the diesel would be the engine to choose, because even the speed advantage of the gas disappears when you can sink money into power upgrades for the Cummins. Stock for stock is the only way the gas wins a race.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
Yeah, we already discussed Durability, DIESELS are more reliable, that's a fact. Just like it's a fact that they have higher compression, which produced more torque. I don't see the gas for the Speed advantage. I'm sure it will do about 7 seconds or so to 60, becuase it's heavier than the Ram 1500. Stock for Stock, the gas wins because it's a V-8. a V-8 pickup at that.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology Number of cylinders has little to do with it, honestly. Size, build quality, and design makes up for 95% or more of an engine's capabilities.
For example, inline engines typically make torque more easily (not sure why, but they do) and last longer, but are impractical in most vehicles (I-6s are highest cylinder count engines used in cars since about 1930 or so), so haven't caught on. That's why the Cummins is so reliable and makes power so easily when upgraded.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
Actually numver of cylinders has to do with it a ton. Because a V-8 is a V-8. That I-6 torque, is actually a myth. Commercial companies started out using I-6's because they fit the easiest in a Semiengine. The strongest engines used in Europe (Scania, Mercedes trucks, Volvo, MAN,) All top out with more Hp, and A lot more torque than American trucks. And they actually use the same cylinder. And Cummins, 6.7L isn't more reliable than any other.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology I've heard the Euro trucks top out higher. Scania, especially, makes super high-output engines.
But you check Wikipedia, 'Straight-six engine' and it will tell you, that the inline six diesel engine is used in 'virtually every medium-duty to large over-the-road trucks' and says 'It's virtues are superior low-end torque, very long service life, smooth operation, and dependability.'
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
"Euro trucks top out higher".
Yeah I-6's are used more often because they are a better shape for a commercial engine
But the most common reason, is that they have something like 40% less moving parts than a V-8 which makes them more reliable.
That Wikipedia article is going by a debunked myth that was stated on Truckin' magazine.
SCANIA V-8's doesn't have any feature that would give it an advantage over a Volvo I-6, yet it has the most Hp, and Torque of any truck.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology Ok, so you just told me right there, that the Cummins I-6 is more reliable than a V-8, but you said earlier it was no more reliable.
As for the Scania, I'm not into large trucks, so I have no solid explanation for why the Scania engine would be more powerful. My best guess is that it's down to the tuning (different timing, fuel injection amounts, etc). That's not so much a feature as a difference in expertise, I guess.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
In General I-6's are more reliable because of the much fewer moving parts, and I will admit the 12v was awarded the most reliable I believe. But with the coming of the 6.7, whether that itself was unreliable or Duramax and Power Strokes became more reliable, truck magazines don't seem to think so.
Several times it's (down to the tuning) because so many times I have seen V-8 Diesels more powerul than I-6's. Almost all high-end Euro motors use V-8's while the lower ends are I-6's.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology I don't know that reliability is any different between the current crop of light-truck diesels, and I don't think I said the Cummins was any more reliable than the rest in the first place, just more reliable than gas (I'm sticking to the argument between the Dodge with a 6.4 HEMI and a 6.7 Cummins).
Again, I'm not into big trucks, so my opinion on those is honestly null. I don't know that the number of cylinders specifically has anything to do with it, just space issues.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
I already said I know that the diesel model will be more reliable. But I would go for the gas because for one It will probably be cheaper. But also I've allways wanted a dually gasser. One that has a decent amount of power too, sure it doesn't have the torque of the Cummins.
I think this will be a first to allow a gas engine ina dually. Maybe Silvy's can, but they use the weak 6.0, as opposed to the more powerfull 6.0, which would have been a better choice.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology LOL, Chevy has an 8.1L gas engine (or used to) that makes less power than the new 6.4 HEMI. They were offered in the Silverado HD (which I believe would also have been available with that engine in dually form). I know Dodge and Ford also had large gas engines for their HD trucks (The 8.0L V10 the original Viper motor was based on was the Dodge one), so I assume those would have been available with gas in dually form as well.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
Yeah, the 8.1 was not a "Euro style" engine (as I like to call it) where it gets a lot of power out of the liters.
I'd have to look into that, possible craigslist.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology The 8.1 is like one of those old 60s and 70s mid-range engines (mostly non-Mopar engines) that had huge displacement, and very little power.
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
Sounds like the 6.0, and 8.1 Vortec. They don't have any Hp grabbing technology like VCT, or DOHC. And of course they're gas engines , so they don't have a turbo like a diesel does.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology In essence, they're *kinda* like the Viper engine: 8.0, 8.3, or 8.4 they were all massive engines and they were pushrod, OHV, 2 valves per cylinder, so they made little power for their size (except the 8.4, that's a little better @ 600HP). Hennessey knew that, though, and did something about it XD. Twin turbo, 1200hp!
mj20042 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology Just as a side-note: Who the fuck are you to be saying I'm a little kid that plays with dolls? And for that matter, what's up with your last comment? You like "to run kids over. It makes me orgasm." Is it supposed to be a credit to your argument or your sense of taste that you have a sick sense of humor and a twisted mind?
mj20042 1 year ago
@mj20042
Yeah I like to run kids over, and I called you a kid. THAT'S WHAT THE FUCK. I have an orgasm when I do it. Yes I have a twisted mind. And I like Fords and Chevy's so get that right.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago
@SecularTechnology You're not really helping your point...
mj20042 1 year ago
that grill is just way too big , every year it gets bigger . looks like a tonka toy and not a real truck
CactusBobsPlace 1 year ago
im sorry but at some point in these truck power wars between the diesels there is gonna be a major problem with transmitting all that power to the ground? am i right or am i right!!!
anthonycarrolljr 1 year ago
it is in production
im in canada i have a 450 lariat...honestly the best truck i ever drove
DUSHANMANGRUE 1 year ago
this truck has an 8 ft box?
LobatosMetalManiac 1 year ago
I wish they would have kept the large F-series badge on the side, but other than that the 2011 is awesome.
SecularTechnology 1 year ago 2
why change the looks? The truck looks great, and the new 6.7l is a freakin beast.
mbulls372 1 year ago
Sad that these trucks still look pretty much the same since 1999, except the better looking grille and interior.
Als that is stupid to say that diesels need to be loud, most people like a quiet motor.
cowboy5632 1 year ago
@cowboy5632 ever heard don't mess with perfection?
Trigun075 1 year ago
doors, cab and box look the same since 1999
partyhouse88 1 year ago
i want captains chairs and a center console in the back row.
565Customz 1 year ago
styling is so old. Looks like a 99'
pelagic6 1 year ago
@pelagic6 God, I know right! Just like the Mustangs right now! It's like, all they do is refresh the appearance like EVERY other company!
bezzle67 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Fucking Dodge boys are just pissed because Ford has made a good diesel the 6.7 to redem them selfs after the 6.0 junk. The durajoke boys are pissed because they are getting farther behind in the diesel world!!! LET THE POWERSTROKE LIVE ON!!!
indianadieselboy 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Fucking Dodge boys are just pissed because Ford has made a good diesel the 6.7 to redem them selfs after the 6.0 junk. The durajoke boys are pissed because they are getting farther behind in the diesel world!!! LET THE POWERSTROKE LIVE ON!!!
indianadieselboy 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Them fucking Dodge boys are just pissed because Ford has made a good diesel the 6.7 to redem them selfs after the 6.0 junk. The durajoke boys are pissed because they are getting farther behind in the diesel world!!! LET THE POWERSTROKE LIVE ON!!!
indianadieselboy 1 year ago
get the 6.7 diesel. never buy a 2500 gas. this truck is something else. dont compare it to the 6.0
rsr530 1 year ago
not loud enough, i will keep my 01 cummins
Techie223 2 years ago
@Techie223 Could not agree more!!!! that being said I'm sure the aftermarket will come out with some kind of tune to make it sound louder!
DieselnDrums 1 year ago
@Techie223 Not loud enough? LOL. Finally a man that realizes a diesel shouldn't be quiet. I'm a Ford guy myself, but can't knock a Cummins. They are monsters.
bisquik3006 1 year ago
my dad just bought one of these at a dealership in phoenix
cnjjhs 2 years ago
how much?
purogto32 2 years ago
Truck looks great!! I'm thinking of trading my 05 F250 for a crew cab short bed 4x4 with the 6.2 Gas. Can you can a locking diff with the manual shift 4wheel drive?
rumerboyz 2 years ago
electronic rear diff available on single rear wheel - assignment and setup with specific trans not yet released...
ford482 2 years ago
Oh,ok thanks.
rumerboyz 2 years ago
6.2 gas? dont you mean 6.8 or 5.4 if were tlkin fords
indyindependent1 2 years ago
Ford's new Gas is a 6.2 with 400 horsepower. You can still get the v-10 6.8 though I think only in the F350 and up.
rumerboyz 2 years ago
that is sooo awesome.. is it another triton like the 5.4 what are they doing with the 5.4?
indyindependent1 2 years ago
I think the 5.4 is done in the truck department.
rumerboyz 2 years ago
6.2 v8 is actually a rather dissapointing 385hp.
34mxrider 1 year ago
no the 5.4 and 6.8 has been replaced in the super duty withe 385 hp 6.2 gas
guitarman2116 1 year ago
@rumerboyz Electric locking only available as said on SRW, limited slips are DRW. Highest locker is 3.55, 4x4 available, and there are no manual transmissions. 6 speed automatic with tow haul and semi automatic mode.
poho110 1 year ago